
mm 




lut, 



t<ZSo\\X\iov\S 



Stilus, JoscpH C. 

&q\\V*akiA m "Hie ^cr-ne^a-l assembW 
*vhi*c|» -met in Hz.f**oiir »*» May la^T 

Washington, 1S50, 




Class 



Book S &J 



7~ 



SPEECH 



ON THE 



SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS 



DELIVERED IN THE 



GENERAL ASSEMBLY 



WHICH MET IN DETROIT IN MAY LAST, 



BY 



JOSEPH C. STILES. 







s WASHINGTON: 

PRINTER BY J NO. T. TOWERS 

1850. 



To the Rev. J. C. Stiles : 

Dear Sir :— The undersigned, having listened with deep interest and gratification to 
your argument upon the Slavery question, delivered before the General Assembly at its 
late session in Detroit, respectfully request that you will, at your earliest convenience, pre- 
pare a report of it for publication, with any such abbreviation or expansion of the several 
parts as may suit your own pleasure. 
May 30, 1850. 

Chas. H. Read, Geo. Duffield, 

William Sterlixg, Erskine Mason, 
David H. Riddle, Joseph F. Tuttle, 

Clifford S. Arms, S. M. Gould, 

J. Henry Clark, A. C. Lathrop, 

David Malin, J. G. Wilson, 

Geo. F. Wiswell, David Dobie, 

Geo. Duffield, Jr. E. D. Willis, 

Charles Starr, J. Holmes Agnew. 



Dear Brethren :— Absence from home, feeble health, and multiplied engagements, 
have prevented my earlier compliance with your kind request. I have made liberal use, 
you perceive, of its latitude, especially in writing out certain arguments which were only 
numbered or named during the delivery of the residue. 

With great respect, brethren, 

I am yours, 

JOS. C. STILES. 
Messieurs Chas. H. Read, Wm. Sterling, and others. 



SPEECH. 



Mr. Moderator : — On this long-vexed question, at this very 
moment menacing more than ever the rupture of Church and 
State, permit me to express my strong conviction that he argues 
most cogently who argues most kindly. May I be assisted to re- 
member this. I shall express myself with the earnestness of fresh 
investigation, but I beseech my brethren to interpret all my lan- 
guage as uttered under the conviction of ultimate fallibility, 
whatever may be the seeming confidence of the moment. Espe- 
cially does it become me to cherish this remembrance when I call 
to mind that the South is the land of my birth, and the home of 
my kindred, and may well therefore be exerting a present influ- 
ence over my judgment of which I am altogether unconscious. 

The Memorialists complain of the Southern Church, and charge 
her, not so much with slave-making, nor with slave-trading, as 
with slave-holding. They direct the attention of the Assembly 
to the character of this institution, and inquire concerning the 
method of its expulsion from the Presbyterian Body. 

Two solemn questions demand our investigation : 

What is the moral character of slaveholding ? 
What the duties of the parties concerned 1 

FIRST. THE MORAL CHARACTER OF SLAVEHOLDING? 

It need hardly be stated that he who exerts a compulsory au- 
thority over a human being as a master, who holds a fellow-man 
in the relation of involuntary servitude, is the party implicated 
in the charge. 

Let it be premised that in this investigation we are bound to 
regard slaveholding in its most favorable aspect. Who are before 
us ? The Southern Public at large ? No, sir ! We have nothing 
to do with it. It is the membership and the ministry of the Pres- 
byterian Church who stand accused. They are our brethren and 
uncondemned. We are bound therefore in Christian justice to 
consider them as carrying out this relation with all the good feel- 
ing and principle of which its nature will admit. 

The Memorialists affirm that slaveholding is sin. 

If it is simply intended that slaveholding, in the language of the 
Majority Report, " leads to sin," I am prepared to yield my hearty 
assent. In the master, slaveholding insensibly tends to breed in- 
dolence, pride, impatience, irritability, hard-heartedness, and arbi- 
trary temper. It tends to make the servant discontented, deceitful, 



6 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 

and dishonest ; to break down every high motive to general in- 
dustry, as well as to all intellectual and moral culture. It saps 
the energies of a community, discourages personal enterprise, and 
perils universal peace. Yet while the moral bearings of slave- 
holding do, in general, lie in this direction, it should be conceded 
that this relation does frequently present the most amiable testi- 
monies of mutual affection and fidelity, on the part of master and 
servant. Nay ! strange as it may seem, I am persuaded that 
there exists more love and confidence between the two races at 
the South than at the North. 

The sinful tendency of slaveholding, however, is not all that 
our brethren would express by the language employed. They 
charge that slaveholding is sin per se, sin in itself , nothing but s hi. 
They insist that he who holds this relation for a moment, thereby 
sins ; that every act of a master's authority over his servant is an 
act of oppression ; in fine, that there is no law from heaven appli- 
cable to this relation but the law of immediate abolition. This, 
in general, will be conceded to be a fair statement of the views 
of the Memorialists. 

Mr. Moderator, this method of expression I am not prepared to 
adopt, and must beg leave respectfully to say, that in my judg- 
ment, the proposition which affirms that slaveholding is essentially 
sinful is overthrown, first, by a simple statement of the facts in the 
case, and again by a just view of every argument adduced to sup- 
port it. 

First. Statement of the case. 

Slaveholding is an existing relation between man and man. 
We hold it true of human relations, that there are three grand 
moral grades: one purely virtuous, another purely vicious, and a 
third of a compound nature. 

A relation perfectly virtuous is marked by the five following 
criteria: — 1. It is directly planned by God for the good of man. 
2. Its moral bearings are decidedly salutary. 3. Christianity can, 
and does, coalesce with it, i. e., it acts in and through it. 4. Chris- 
tianity can, and does, regulate it. 5. Christianity will but im- 
prove it to the close of time. The relations of parent and child, 
of husband and wife, illustrate this class. 

The characteristics of a relation perfectly sinful are the follow- 
ing: — 1. It is expressly forbidden by God. 2. Its moral bearings 
are decidedly injurious. 3. Christianity cannot coalesce with it. 
4. Christianity cannot regulate it. 5. Christianity in its progress 
will surely do it away. Professional thieves — associated pirates 
illustrate this class. 

There exists also such a state of things in human society as a 
mixed relation. In the sense above described, it is neither purely 
virtuous on the one hand, nor purely vicious on the other, but 
partakes of the properties of both. 

Now under which of these categories shall we place the rela- 
tion of slaveholding ? Certainly not under the first head. As 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 7 

clearly not under the second. Palpably under the third. Observe 
two facts. Slaveholdingdoes not bear the first and capital mark 
either of relations perfectly virtuous, or of those perfectly vicious. 
It was not planned by God on the one hand, neither is it expressly 
forbidden by God on the other. Again, slaveholding equally di- 
vides the four remaining characteristics of each class. It lacks 
two of the essential marks of relations perfectly pure, viz : virtu- 
ous bearing, and permanency under the gospel ; but possesses the 
remaining two, viz.: co-existence with the gospel (i. e., the mas- 
ter's exercise of compulsory authority may be a duty discharged,) 
and regulation by it, (i. e., the gospel does lay down rules to guide 
the conduct both of the master and the slave.) In like manner 
slaveholding possesses two essential marks of relations perfectly- 
sinful, viz.: vicious bearing, and disappearance under the progress 
of the gospel ; while it clearly lacks the two remaining essential 
properties of such relations — impossible coincidence with the gos- 
pel, and impossible regulation by it. 

I apprehend that this statement of truth few men will dispute. 
In general, mankind will promptly admit, first, that in moral 
character, human relations are threefold, good, bad, and mixed ; 
second, that slaveholding belongs to the third category, and not 
to the first, or second — in a word, that in morality, slaveholding 
stands between such relations as parent and child, and husband 
and wife, on the one hand, and such relations as banded thieves 
and murderers on the other. 

If these be facts, then without argument, upon a mere state- 
ment of the case, it appears that slaveholding, as a relation, is not 
sinful in itself. Consequently Southern brethren are not obnox- 
ious to church discipline simply because they do not instantly 
adopt Abolition principles. 

In weighing this statement of the case, permit me to say, 

1st. Our Abolition brethren should not aggrieve us who hold 
more moderate principles, by the misstatement of our moral esti- 
mate of this relation. It does seem to us that by the law of un- 
righteous position, of inordinate feeling, in their ordinary state- 
ment of our sentiments our brethren are unconsciously impelled 
to wrong our principles in order to justify their own. We do not 
hold (as we are often said to do) that slaveholding is either a 
Bible institution or that it receives God's high sanction. On the 
contrary, unlike every such institution, it was not planned by 
God, does not naturally tend to the good of society, and will as- 
suredly fall before the gospel. It will break half their opposition, 
if our brethren will think and speak of our sentiments as we 
think and speak of the subject. 

2d. Our Abolition brethren should sustain us by the prompt ad- 
mission that slaveholding is a relation which God in the Scrip- 
tures does certainly recognize and regulate. We hold that slave- 
holding, unlike relations purely sinful, is not expressly prohibited 
by God, but does consist with the spirit, principle, and practice of 



8 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 

Christianity, so far at least that God does certainly prescribe the 
duties which become the parties in this relation. It will throw 
our brethren largely into sympathy with us if they will bind them- 
selves on every hand to concede this undeniable truth, viz.: If 
slavery is not a regular institution of the Bible, it is a scripturally 
regulated relation amongst men. 

3d. If such are the moral characteristics of this relation that 
God neither sanctions it as an institution of his own, nor yet pro- 
hibits it as a relation sinful per se, then it is perfectly reasonable 
that a state of human society, so peculiar, should receive a pecu- 
liar treatment at his hand. This it certainly does. On the one 
hand, he does not enjoin it upon men to form this relation; on the 
other, he does not tear society to atoms by demanding its immedi- 
ate abolition. On the contrary, wherever it exists, he imposes 
rules upon the parties which, if observed, will gradually work it 
off amongst the things that were, and meanwhile contribute to 
accomplish a grand providential end, by giving exercise* to some 
of the most singular and beautiful shapes of the Christian prin- 
ciple. 

4th. In view of this statement, you may infer the response 
which should be given to an inquiry so frequently, solemnly, and 
confide nth/ propounded in this Assembly : "Is slavery right, or is 
it wrong ? If this inquiry respects the relation of slavery, we an- 
swer: It is neither wholly right, nor wholly wrong. There is right 
about it, and there is wrong about it. It has no such right as 
would sanction its enrollment on the catalogue of Bible institu- 
tions. Tt involves no such wrong as should constrain God to 
inflict upon it the anathemas directed against theft and murder. 
If the question respects this or that act of slaveholding, we are 
ready to reply: If the act is performed in obedience to any one of 
the rules which God has prescribed for the conduct of the master, 
like any other act of obedience to God, it is right. If the act is 
performed in violation of any such rule, like any other act of 
disobedience to God, it is wrong. If the question respects the 
character of this or that slaveholder, we answer: If the master in 
question holds his servant in any such spirit, or with any such 
aims, as permit and prompt him to obey the spirit of the rules 
enjoined upon the master in the Word of God, he is an innocent, 
a worthy master. If he holds him in an opposite spirit and for 
opposite ends, he is neither a worthy nor an innocent master. 

We repeat, therefore, upon an intelligent statement of the 
case at large, it is hard to conceive how any candid person could 
adjudge that the simple fact of holding slaves constitutes our 
Southern brethren such "prima facie sinners" as makes it the 
duty of this Assembly, as far as its authority extends, to enjoin 
forthwith the commencement of criminal process against them, 
throughout the length and breadth of the Church. 

If the statement of the case does not carry our brethren with 
us, then, Mr. Moderator, I respond : 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 9 

Second. In my judgment, the arguments advanced to establish 
the entire sinfulness of the relation of master and servant, fairly 
examined, disprove the proposition which they would set up. 

The reasons advanced by opposing brethren on this floor, may 
be grouped under the five following heads : — 

I. The Liberty Argument 

May be stated thus: God has made every man so far free, that no 
one man has a natural right to exercise compulsory authority over 
another. The master does exercise such authority ; therefore he 
sins. The defect of the argument lies in the erroneous statement 
of the major proposition. The fact is, the negation of a natural 
right of control over others is not absolute but qualified. The 
argument, you observe, requires the absolute form of statement, 
viz.: that every exercise of compulsory authority is a violation of 
natural right. Inordinate feeling, I apprehend, is the parent of 
this error. By this phrase — inordinate feeling — I mean such a 
state of mind as cannot justify itself by the facts of the case, and 
therefore unconsciously forces the intellect to sustain its extrava- 
gance, by one of two processes — either by incorporating with the 
subject elevating properties which do not belong to it, or by sep- 
arating from it depreciating circumstances which do attach to it. 
Now inordinate sympathy with the supposed wrongs of the slave — 
how readily it rises, and when roused how impetuously it heaves 
to inflict some palpable and flagrant condemnation upon the 
offender ! How shall this be done ? The fact is, the face of 
society presents a diversified catalogue of cases wherein one 
man exercises compulsory control over another, and thus coun- 
tenances the right of the master. To sustain itself, inordinate 
anti-slavery excitement boldly strikes off the whole series of 
qualifying circumstances, and states the case absolutely. But 
clearly in this shape it is a misstatement. Who questions the 
rightful authority of the parent over the child, the guardian over 
the ward, the principal over the apprentice, the keeper over the 
lunatic, the jailor over the convict, and the governor over the 
subject? The Liberty argument, you perceive, is a failure. God 
has not made man so free that no one man has a right to exer- 
cise a compulsory authority over another. The statement must 
be qualified, and when you qualify it properly, you will find that 
it gives a stronger countenance to this disputed relation than 
would at first be imagined. 

I am prepared now to affirm, that the doctrine of Human 
Rights, properly understood, rather establishes the master's au- 
thority over the servant. I am free to concede, I know no direct 
right of the master. Where shall we find the basis of such a 
right ? Not in any such inferior physical and intellectual struc- 
ture of the African as indicates God's purpose to subject him to 
the permanent dominion of his superior neighbor; not in that 
original curse of God which consigned the descendants of Canaan 



10 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 

to eternal servitude to the posterity of his brethren ; not in the 
fact that the forfeiture of the captive's life on the battle-field 
works a forfeiture of his own liberty and that of his posterity for- 
ever; not in the payment of a valuable consideration for the ser- 
vices of the slave; not in the authority of the law to convert him 
into a chattel ; not in the custom of good men to treat him thus, 
and call it right ; not in your inability to discover what advan- 
tage could accrue to the slave from immediate abolition. No ! 
Mr. Moderator ! every such basis of the master's claim I utterly 
discard. Where then shall we rind in nature a competent foun-% 
dation for the power which the master exercises ? We shall find 
it, I apprehend, largely in the shape of an obligation upon the 
master, resulting from a natural right in the person of the slave. 

Human rights I take to be summarily three. 1st. The right of 
existence. Life is the gift of God, and operates a right of exist- 
ence against all save Him who bestows it. This right involves 
a reasonable use of all the faculties and powers of the subject. 
2d. A right of happiness. The Creator has surrounded man with 
ever}- object suited to refresh the desires of his nature, and thus 
invests him with a right of indulgence, a right of happiness. 3d. 
A right of supervision. God, in creation and providence, fre- 
quently places man in a state of dependence wherein the enjoy- 
ment of his natural rights can never be reached without progres- 
sive development, under competent supervision. This indicates 
a right of supervision. Such a right is universally felt to result 
from the coincidence of three things. Let there exist an inca- 
pacity of self-government, which renders its exercise mischievous 
to the parties and to society, and for which God in creation or 
providence has appointed a guardianship, and all men will feel 
that every such human being has a right to wise and kind super- 
vision. A child by nature has no power of self-government. Left 
to self-direction, a child will surely injure itself and all about it. 
God in the constitution of things has made provision for its neces- 
sity in the parental relation. Were there no other basis than 
this, all men would feel that the child was entitled to supervision 
at the hand of his parent. There results, of course, to the parent, 
a right of authority over the child. So upon the death of the 
parent, and the legal appointment of a guardian, all men feel the 
right of supervision on the one side, and of control on the other. 
So also in the case of the apprentice, of the lunatic, of the con- 
vict, and of the subject. In each of these cases there is for the 
time being a natural or moral incompetency of self-government ; 
in each case, self-government exercised would seriously damage 
the subject and the community; and in each case God has indi- 
cated a governing superior. Now it would seem impossible for 
the human mind to withhold its assent from this truth, viz. : that 
in each of these cases, these three things constitute a clear right 
in the inferior to kind and wise management, and consequently 
confer an indisputable authority on the superior to exercise such 
control. 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 11 

I hold now, Mr. Moderator, that these three things are equally 
applicable to the case in hand. 1st. The slave is incapable of 
self-government. As a general remark who doubts this? 2d. 
The sudden release of the slave from the accustomed direction of 
the master, would produce irreparable mischiefs to himself and to 
society. Who questions this? 3d. God has pointed to the party 
who is to exercise control over him. This too is undeniable. 
Now as in each of the other cases, so in this, these three circum- 
stances lay the basis of a right of supervision on the part of the 
servant, and of course, of control on the part of the master. 
Dispute this position ; carry out your principle. The children of 
this generation rise up in mass, assert that God made them as 
free as their parents, demand immediate absolution from all au- 
thorit}', and set out at once to exercise unrestricted self-govern- 
ment. Does not every eye see, that the child's ignorance of him- 
self, of those who lie in wait to destroy, of the consequences of 
right and wrong conduct, &c, &c, — h'is utter incapacity to sup- 
port, instruct, direct, or defend himself, — in a word, his incessant, 
invisible, unavoidable temptations to an indolent and profligate 
life, would make enlargement from parental control the severest 
curse which could be inflicted upon himself and society, and for 
this reason, the most unrighteous act the parent could perform ? 
Mark the analogy in the case of the slave and that of the child. 
1st. There is in the framework of society an existing practical 
guardianship. 2d. The slave is just as incompetent to guide, 
support, and protect himself; just as much exposed to indolence, 
sensuality and imposition ; and just as certain, freed from the 
master's supervision, to inflict upon himself and society the most 
disquieting and outrageous mischiefs. Now would it be right to 
cast the reins upon his neck and turn him loose, — right to him- 
self, — right to community ? Above all things, I ask, what does 
the child, what does the slave need ? Surely, wise and kind su- 
pervision, until he can be educated to take care of himself, to 
enjoy his liberty. This is a boon of which he stands in perishing 
need. By the law of love, therefore, it is duty not to withhold 
this supervision and leave him to perish, but in efficient wisdom 
and philanthropy to exercise it. 

I hold, Mr. Moderator, that this is by far the most exalted, nay, 
the only perfect law of Human Rights. In the language of the 
Majority Report, " The laws of guardianship'''' and " the demands 
of humanity''' clothe it with an impregnable endorsement. Deny 
this view of the subject, and the end of natural liberty is denied 
to one-half of the human family. Carry out this doctrine faith- 
fully, and all our brethren who are now incompetent to enjoy 
their natural rights are put under a benign supervision, which 
provides the best present substitute for the privation, and secures 
the ultimate beneficial possession of their liberties at the earliest 
period. 

In weighing this view of the Liberty argument, should my bro- 
ther object : 



12 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 

1st. That the parental relation is not slavery, the relation of 
guardian and ward is not slavery, of the lunatic and his keeper 
is not slavery, &c. &c, — I answer, the argument asserts no such 
thing-. There are differences, of course, in different objects. The 
argument simply inquires, first, whether there is not an agree- 
ment in three certain things ; and second, whether those three 
things do not lay the basis of a right of supervision, on the one 
hand, and of control on the other. 

2d. That masters at the South do not hold their slaves by any 
such benignant lien as my doctrine supports; — I admit, the fact 
that very "many do not. And here let me say, that in the sequel 
I hope to secure as frank an admission on his part, that the num- 
ber of masters who do hold some such views on this subject, is 
vastly greater than he had hitherto supposed. 

3d. Should he object again, tlAt my doctrine of natural rights 
does not sustain the doctrine of eternal servitude, I readily grant 
it, and am free for one to say, that I hold no such doptrine. And 
now I trust that my objecting brother will be as prompt to con- 
cede, that the view presented certainly does overthrow his doc- 
trine of sin per se, since his principle imperatively demands im- 
mediate abolition, whereas mine demonstrates in the master an 
indisputable authority for the time being. 

The Liberty argument ! I put it to you, Mr. Moderator, whe- 
ther it does not fight against its author ? 

II. Scripture Argument. 
Mr. Moderator: How does Scripture teach that slaveholding is 
sin ? Where is the text ? It is my deep conviction, sir, that al- 
most as invariably as a religious assembly has entered upon a 
formal discussion of the question before this house, many a sober 
inquirer after truth has been impressed with profound surprise by 
two thing; 5 : The readiness of our Abolition brethren to deal out 
their abhorrence of the man who would prostitute the Scriptures 
to the abetting of any doctrine on this subject save that of abo- 
lition, and yet the extreme reluctance with which they themselves 
come square up to the Scriptures. Mr. Moderator, 1 am sensible 
of no inconsideration when I bear this testimony — that in all the 
discussions I ever remember to have heard on this subject, private 
or public, this has appeared to me in general a characteristic fea- 
ture : Few who hold extreme doctrines attempt a Scripture ar- 
gument, and those who do rarely reach the Word of God. Nor 
can I deny, sir, that our present debate would seem to have moved 
along thus far in very good keeping with this description. One of 
our excellent brethren in his Scriptural discussion avers that sla- 
very in its moral bearings is a violation of the governmental 
system of the Bible. This system develops the intelligence, the 
morality, the dignity, the liberty, and the felicity of man ; but 
slavery'is unfriendly to such results. Another, in Mi Scriptural 
argument, affirms that, in legal interpretation, we are to have de- 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 13 

cisive reference to the grand spirit and principle of the law ; and 
all seeming exceptions should be disposed of, if possible, so as not 
to violate this radical characteristic. Now since the spirit and 
principle of Scripture law is love, slavery must of course be a vio- 
lation of it. I have stated the substance of the views of the 
speakers to the best of my recollection ; and if these brethren 
came nearer to the Scriptures, or any others approached as closely, 
I do not remember it. Why is it that complainants seeking to 
establish a charge of sin seem so strangely compelled to keep at 
arm's length from God's Word, the only standard of sin? Let 
not my brethren be displeased when I express my judgment that 
it had been strange indeed if these good men had made freer use 
of Holy Writ. I believe it to be true, Mr. Moderator, that the 
Scriptural argument generally advanced to support the doctrine 
of immediate abolition, sifted to its foundations, will be found to 
be strictly anf?'-scriptural. In its capital features, I hold it to be 
precisely that method of reasoning which sets aside the Bible and 
lets in all heresy. It is, in one word, neither more nor less than 
a surrender of the Divine declaration to human deduction. Scrip- 
ture says, "The Lord our God is one Lord." Therefore, says 
human reason, God is not Three ! But God himself advances, and 
declares, I am " Father, Son, and Holy Ghost." What does that 
man who objects still 1 He surrenders the second Divine decla- 
ration to his own deduction from the first, and becomes a Unita- 
rian. Scripture says, " God is Love.'''' Then, says human reason, 
God will never destroy His own creature in hell for ever. But 
God responds, " Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire/' 
What now ? Why, he who objects still, discards the Divine de- 
claration and stands upon his own deduction, and becomes a 
Universalist. Scripture says, " God works in man to will." Then, 
says human reason, " Man is not free." But God adds, " Work 
out your salvation." And yet the reasoner objects still. Clearly 
then he gives more credit to the inference of his own judgment 
than to the direct declaration of the God of truth, and thus be- 
comes a Fatalist. So exactly in the case in hand. Scripture 
says God's law is love and justice, and by a thousand texts com- 
mands every man to be equitable and benign in the treatment of 
his neighbor. " Therefore," say our brethren, " in view of this 
great law of justice and mercy, no man can hold a slave and 
please God." But stay ; God himself advances, and responds, 
" Ye masters, while ye stand over your servants, do this and that 
unto them, and you will please me." I ask my brethren, first, 
whether this is not the clear voice of the New Testament ? I ask 
again, if they still insist that he who holds a slave, do what he 
may, sins against God, whether they do not place more reliance 
upon their own judgment than upon God's knowledge ? Whether 
they do not sacrifice God's teaching to their own reasoning 1 If 
they do, then the Scripture argument of Abolitionism is anti- 
scriptural. 



14 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS. 

I know of but two classes of texts employed by opposing breth- 
ren. 

The first is positive, and may be summed up in the second table 
of the law : " Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." There 
is perhaps no one word of Scripture quoted with more confidence 
on this subject than this form of the general commandment : " Do 
unto others as ye would have others do unto you." One of our 
brethren, doubtless in allusion to this passage, thus expresses him- 
self: " My objection to slavery is this, I do not want to be a slave." 
Had the Saviour said, " Do unto others in their circumstanc.es as 
you would have them do unto you in yours'' the passage would 
prove the doctrine it is brought to establish, but the world would 
lose far more than the slave would gain. Such an interpretation 
destroys all the wisdom and philanthropy of this noble text. This 
word of Jesus Christ rather requires us to do unto others in their 
circumstances as we would have them do unto us were we in the 
same. As I am, like my brother, I do not desire to be a slave. But 
were I in the place of the slave, — on the one hand destitute of all 
competent capacity to support, protect, or guide myself; on the 
other, subjected to the authority of a superior, who managed me 
largely that he might ultimately develop my power to serve God. 
man, and myself to higher advantage, — then I am prepared to 
say I would desire to be a slave. This whole class of passages 
therefore, properly interpreted, sustains the relation as I have at- 
tempted to explain it. 

The second class is negative, and is summed up in this senti- 
ment : "Thou shalt not oppress thy neighbor." The power of 
this class of passages is destroyed by the application of a well 
known rule of interpretation, viz.: General laws are always to 
give way to Particular laws. The reason is obvious. You reach 
the will of the legislator more surely through his own language, 
expressed in the Particular law, than you do through your infer- 
ence concerning his will, drawn from his words in the General 
law. In the formation of a General law, the eye of the legislator 
passes over a large field of particulars, and without resting on 
any one of them for a moment, employs itself in comparing this 
general truth with other general truths, that he may mark their 
distinguishing features. Now it is only through an 'interpreter's 
inference that you cover any particular case by the General law. 
Whenever therefore the legislator himself takes up any particular 
case and expresses himself thereupon, most surely you are not now 
to go back to your inferences from the General law. You have 
express evidence of his will. General laws of course always find 
their interpretation in the special laws enacted upon the same 
subject. Now, Mr. Moderator, I call upon my brethren to say 
whether God in the New Testament does not treat of this precise 
relation of master and servant ; whether he does not in his own 
language bring up a great variety of supposed acts on the part 
of the master to the slave and of the slave to the master; whether 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 15 

he does not explicitly express himself touching his own estimate 
of the moral character of these acts 1 Mr. Moderator, through 
you I do beseech my brethren to give me an explicit response to 
this question : So far from announcing to men that any act of a 
master, as such, to a servant, as such, is an act of oppression, 
does not God on the contrary most perspicuously and repeatedly 
affirm that such and such acts of the master are what he would 
have him do — are his duty — are what God himself deems not op- 
pressive, but absolutely right to his fellow-men 1 What then, sir, 
have we, under law, to do with our inferences of oppression, when 
the Ruler himself instructs us that these very miscalled acts of 
oppression are but duty commanded, the very wisest, kindest, and 
best acts in the circumstances the party can perform ; the very 
acts which He, the Maker, calls for ? 1 put it to you, Mr. Mod- 
erator, whether the Scripture testimony relied upon to prove the 
doctrine of sin per se is not an eminent failure? 

You are prepared now to have me advance and say, that in 
my judgment the Scriptures, properly interpreted, destroy the 
doctrine of sin per se in the very manner in which it is held to 
establish it. 

Positively. It is an undeniable truth that God in the Old Tes- 
tament authorizes the Jew to sustain the relation of a master to 
his heathen slave. 

In the 25th chapter of Leviticus, God contrasts at length two 
classes of servants — Jewish and heathen. He ordains that they 
occupy different grades. The Jewish servant is to receive the 
treatment of an hired servant. "As an hired servant he shall be 
with thee.'' The heathen servant is to receive the treatment of 
a slave. " Thy bondmen and thy bondmaids shall be of the 
heathen." Two points of contrast are clearly laid down. First, 
the Jewish servant was redeemable by himself or his kinsmen at 
any time. " One of his brethren may redeem him, or if he be 
able he may redeem himself." The heathen servant was not re- 
deemable. " They shall be your possession." Second, the Jewish 
servant must be released at the jubilee. " He shall go out in the 
year of jubilee, both he and his children with him." The heathen 
servant was not to be released at the jubilee. " Ye shall take 
them as an inheritance for your children after you." 

I readily admit that God in l he laws of Moses furnishes various 
indications of his compassion toward the slave, and some signs of 
his unwillingness to look with permanent favor upon this institu- 
tion ; and yet, as a general regulation for the time being, it is an 
indisputable fact that God does here recognize and authorize ihe 
relation of master and bondman. "They shall be your bcnuhnen 
for ever." 

Now the question arises : Can the holding of a divinely-air ho- 
rized relation be a sin per se ? Can obedience and sin co-exist? 
My brother responds, "There are Christian sinners as well as 
other sinners." Mr. Moderator, my brother's mind in this Ian- 



16 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 

guage does not come within sight of the argument. That Chris- 
tianity, that obedience to God, can co-exist with sin in the man 
everybody knows ; but this is heaven-wide of the case. Can 
Christianity co-exist with sin in the act ? That is the point. Can 
obedience n ake up a part of sin ? You say that slaveholding is 
an act of sin. The Word of God here shows you that slaves were 
held of old in obedience to a divine regulation. In what part of 
an act of idolatry or an act of murder can you put obedience to 
God ? If 1 mistake not, the teaching is — "These are contrary the 
one to the other." If then obedience is not disobedience, and men 
held slaves of old in obedience to Old Testament teaching, the 
holding of a slave is not an act of sin. 

Again : It is a Scripture fact that the New Testament recog- 
nizes the relation of master and servant, and imposes reciprocal 
duties upon the parties. Who questions this fact ? It will not 
be disputed that the Scriptures on the one hand command the 
servant, in view of the master's claims, to "obey," to " honor," 
and to "be subject" to him; "not despising him," " not answering 
him back," not "purloining from him," &c; on the other, that 
they enjoin it upon masters, in view of the claims of the servant, 
to " do the same things unto them," especially to " give unto them 
that which is just and equal," to "forbear threatening," and to 
remember in all their treatment of their slaves that they too 
" have a Master in heaven." 

The argument upheld by this unquestionable Scripture fact 
may be thus stated: What God commands man to do is not sin. 
God commands man to do the duties of a master ; therefore the 
man who discharges the prescribed duties of a master does not 
sin. Against what point will you drive your objection to this ar- 
gument? Against the major proposition? Surely not. Who 
dares to say what God commands it is sin to do ? Against the 
minor proposition ? Surely not. Who will venture to affirm that 
God does not lay commands upon the master touching his obliga- 
tion to his servant ? Against the conclusion? Surely not. For 
if he who follows God's commands is not a sinner, then the mas- 
ter who follows God's commands does not sin. What will my 
brethren do with this argument ? How can the doctrine of sin 
per se and the doctrine of the New Testament stand together? 
To hold a slave is a sin in itself. Yet God tells the master how 
to hold his slave, and what to do with him. Can God tell a 
creature how to commit sin ? Can a sin-hating God make rules 
to direct the idolater, the murderer, the thief, in the work they 
do? Can a sovereign God give rules to a subject to break his 
own law ? How preposterous the position of our brethren ! The 
whole controversy comes to this : If God has a right to give laws 
to his creatures, the holding of slaves is not singer se. 

Negatively. Let it be premised that it lies at the basis of 
every word of God to his creatures, that whatever is sin God 
requires every soul to abandon instantly. The doctrine of our 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 17 

brethren therefore, the doctrine, of sin-in-itself carries to every 
slaveholder God's command of immediate abolition. Now, the 
Bible, so far from requiring the instantaneous disruption of the 
tie between master and servant, contemplates its continuance. 
You may see this truth in the absence of all evidence of its 
divine discontinuance. Had Christianity demanded the immedi- 
ate abolition of this venerable, deep-seated, all-pervading feature 
of the frame- work of ancient society, there must have sprung up 
a sudden, prodigious, and perilous domestic and political agita- 
tion, which would have blazed out upon every record which 
descended to us from primitive times. But we have not one 
reliable word of any such revolution, either in Scripture precept 
or narration, or in ecclesiastical or profane histor3\ You may 
see it in the presence of everything which would naturally indi- 
cate the fact that Christianity did not abrogate this relation. 
Here are God's commands to the parties respectively. Tell me, 
how can a master or a servant do his duty except through the 
existence of the relation itself? Here is the palpable tenor of 
Scripture teaching. More than once on the holy page, God 
states, seriatim, the duties of parent and child, the duties of hus- 
band and wife, and the duties of master and servant. When 
God states the duties of parents and children, he means surely 
that the parties are to go forward discharging the same. So 
when God prescribes the duties of husband and wife, he requires 
the parties to go on and perform them. This you admit. Now 
when God addresses the same species of commands to master 
and servant, surely he intends that they too shall proceed to do 
as he has commanded, i. e., he palpably contemplates the contin- 
uance, not the disruption of the relation. Here, too, is the obvi- 
ous force of Bible terms and phrases. Servants are more than 
once commanded to obey their masters "in all things." The 
multitude and diversity of acts of obedience which make up the 
sum total of a servant's duty cannot be crowded into one 
moment. To meet this necessity, therefore, the relation must 
continue. The master too is commanded to do the "same 
things" to his servant; and these same things are not one or two 
acts of duty, but a multitude, and of course demand the preserva- 
tion of the relation for the time being. " Let every man," says 
the apostle, "abide in the same calling wherein he is called." 
Conversion does not require a change in a man's natural, social, 
or civil obligations. Abide contented in your condition, whether 
married or single, whether bond or free. "Art thou called being 
a servant? Care not for it." Continue contented in your rela- 
tion to your earthly master, for you are the Lord's freeman. 
This language clearly teaches the valid existence of the relation 
after the Conversion of the servant; while Paul's last word utter- 
ly demolishes the allegation that primitive Christianity wrought 
the immediate abolition of this institution: "But if thou mai/cst 
be made free, use it rather." Certainlv, the apostle says, "You 
2 



18 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 

are a slave. Well ! remain contented in your calling, and do 
your duty. Should it happen however that Providence opens a 
way whereby you may acquire your freedom, this on the whole 
is a better state ; avail yourself of it." Finally, here is the histo- 
rical fact of the recognized existence and validity of this relation 
naturally running a|f>ng the sacred record through a continuous 
period. Jn the year of our Lord 59, Paul addresses his bond 
brethren in the church of Corinth. In 60, Peter sends his instruc- 
tions to the servants scattered through the churches of Asia 
Minor. In 64, Paul calls up the attention of those who belong to 
the churches of Ephesus, Colosse, and Philippi. And in 65, Paul 
educates Timothy and Titus in the proper method of teaching 
and exhorting the respective parties to this relation. 

In view of this evidence, what intelligent mind can believe 
for a moment that Christianity as administered by the apostles 
did actually put to death the relation of master and servant, as 
an institution too sinful to breathe under its eye? Such a 
stroke had jarred the world, and its tremors had been felt to this 
day, at least in the records which reach us from earlier times. 
But where is the testimony to any such occurrence? On the 
contrary, there on the face of the sacred record stands ac- 
knowledged, regulated slavery. God's commands to the parties 
presuppose the existence of the relation, else the commands 
themselves would not have been delivered; and its valid con- 
tinuance, else the created duties could not be discharged. God's 
Word requires the parties to abide in the relation in which 
Christianity finds them, describes a continuous obligation on both 
sides, and speaks of the dissolution of the relation only as a pos- 
sible occurrence; while God's ministers from church to church, 
and from year to year, are found most solemnly dealing with 
master and servant as variously bound to each other and deeply 
responsible to God. 

Thus, if I have rightly understood the Word of God, there is no 
testimony upon its pages, either positive or negative, that slave- 
holding is sin per se ; but ample evidence, both negative and 
positive, that the holding of a slave is not of necessity a sin. 

I put it to you, Mr. Moderator, whether the Scripture argu- 
ment of our brethren, fairly investigated, like the argument from 
Natural Liberty, does not recoil upon its author and overthrow 
the doctrine it was enlisted to establish 1 

III. The Historical Argument. 

Our brethren contend that the divine imposition of reciprocal 
duties upon master and servant, in the New Testament, does not 
protect slaveholding from the charge of sin per se, because, 

I. It is an historical fact that there were no slaves in the primi- 
tive Churchr that the Greek terms translated in our version 
" servant," do not mean " slave," but freed-servant. 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 19 

I apprehend, Mr. Moderator, it will be no easy task to set aside 
the adverse testimony already elicited from the Scriptures in the 
discussion of previous topics. But let us examine this argument 
on its own merits. 

I affirm that the cardinal rules of interpretation indisputably 
fix the current import of the disputed terms, i. e., the New Testa- 
ment "servant" was a slave. 

1st. Words are to be understood in their most known and usu- 
al signification. Consult every cotemporaneous Greek writer, 
every lexicographer, commentator and Biblical critic, and there 
would be assembled a harmonious mass of testimony in favor of 
the popular import of these terms, which would probably silence 
the most prejudiced opponent. 

2d. Words are to be defined by reference to their connection. 
Again, words are of course to be explained in view of their use 
in different passages. Still again, words are to be understood in 
reference to the nature of the subject about which they are em- 
ployed. These three rules are identical in their application to 
the case in point. Group together all the predicates of the term 
"servant" in the New Testament, collect all the commands, pro- 
hibitions, and admonitions addressed to this person, and we shall 
find that the Scriptures seem to describe the state and character 
of the slave with great clearness, and to prescribe for it with 
great address. 

Every condition in life has its peculiar besetments. Those of 
the slave are strongly marked. 

The first peculiar temptation of the slave is, to serve from ne- 
cessity only, and therefore without conscience toward God. His 
condition strongly tempts him to feel that in truth there is no 
moral obligation in the case ; no, not even to his Maker. Now 
the Scriptures see this, and multiply such injunctions as the fol- 
lowing: "Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters 
according to the flesh, in singleness of heart as unto Christ." 
"As the servant of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart." 
" Doing service as to the Lord and not to men." Knowing that 
God will amply reward your fidelity. 

The second peculiar temptation of the slave is to serve from 
necessity only, and therefore icithout love to his master. His 
seeming to receive so small a benefit from his labors, naturally 
unites with other influences to indispose him to work with a kind 
and cheerful heart. The Scriptures see this, and meet the neces- 
sity of the case by imposing upon servants such commands as 
these: "Count your masters worthy of all honor; despise them 
not, because they are brethren ; rather do them service, because 
they are faithful and beloved partakers of the ,benefits ;" " Nerve 
them in singleness of heart;" "Please them in all things;'' 
"With good will doing service." 

The third peculiar temptation is this: He never serves when 
he can help it, and will only pretend to serve when this is neces- 



20 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 

sary to secure him from the displeasure of his superior. The 
Scriptures see this, and thus admonish the servant: "Obey not 
with eye-service? Mark here, first, lack of principle. There is 
no conscience toward God, no love of his master, nothing to rouse 
him to labor until the eye of his master falls upon him. Again, 
fearfulness and pretense. The eye of the master starts him to 
serve, and always with an air as though he had not been idle. 
How strikingly does the slave fill out this description. Who that 
has lived in a slave-land does not instantly recall times and occa- 
sions without number or description, in which he has first seen» 
the lounging slave, and then the instant motive power of the 
master's eye, at least upon his frame 1 No wonder the Scrip- 
tures repeat the injunction, " not with eye-service? Again, the 
Scriptures admonish servants to obey their masters, " not as men- 
pleasers." They seem to say, ' Do not feel that you have accom- 
plished every end if you have simply kept the man, the master, 
from being displeased with you.' He who is familiar with the 
practical operation of slavery, will not be surprised that the 
Scriptures repeat the injunction, "not as men-plea sers." 

The fourth peculiar temptation is this : The slave serves with 
his body when he must, and lets out the rebellion of his heart 
when he may. The Scriptures see this, and command servants, 
" Count your masters worthy of all honor." " Be subject to them 
with all fear." There is a profound respect indicated in this lan- 
guage which hardly befits any existing relation between freemen, 
but well becomes the more humble and dependent condition of the 
slave. The Scriptures add, "not answering again." Sound 
judgment, I apprehend, discovers some lack of propriety in the 
application of such a precept to the dignity and rights of a free- 
man, though a servant ; while it must appreciate its consummate 
importance to him who is the most dependent of all men. The 
Scriptures impose a deeper humiliation upon the servant, and 
command him to obey his master "with fear and trembling." 
That such an injunction should be addressed to a freeman is in- 
conceivable ; even to him who occupies the most abject admissi- 
ble state among men it would seem to be a very strong prescrip- 
tion. But Scripture advances still one step further, and enjoins 
it upon the servant when " buffeted," and not " for your faults, to 
take it patiently ;" yes ! and go on to serve even " the froward." 
None other counsel than this can be addressed to the slave in view 
of the necessities of his condition ; but to require a freeman when 
buffeted unrighteously to submit to it with patience, and continue 
in the service of the froward, is what I judge no man interprets 
the Bible to teach. 

The last temptation of the slave is to feel that since his master 
will not pay him for his labor when he ought, he may pay him- 
self when he can. I suspect it is naturally an underground pub- 
lic sentiment in every community of slaves, that there is no theft 
in taking from the master. Little pilfering, apart from the power 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 21 

of the gospel, will be very apt to prevail where slavery exists. 
The Scriptures see this and say, Obey your masters " not pur- 
loining.''''* 

By the rule of interpretation now under discussion, the disputed 
word " servant" must find its definition in the nature of the sub- 
ject which it is employed to express. We have the description of 
the subject full before us in the Scripture. I affirm that herein 
the Bible describes the qualities and circumstances of the slave, 
because, as we have seen, every appeal of the Scriptures speaks 
with singular application to the peculiarities of his character and 
condition. I affirm that the Bible does not describe the free ser- 
vant, because there is no peculiar basis in his character or state 
for any one of all the Scriptural commands addressed to the ser- 
vant. A freeman serves whom he chooses, as long as he chooses, 
and for what he chooses ; he is paid for his labor, and loses em- 
ployment if he is not diligent, skilful, and respectful. There is 
nothing therefore in his condition which naturally impels him to 
serve either without conscience toward God or kindness toward 
man, or which gives such power to the master's eye ; nothing 
which peculiarly exposes him either to deception or discontent or 
dishonesty ; nothing that demands either a trembling service or 
abject submission to injurious treatment. 

3d. Another rule of interpretation requires us, when one leg of 
an antithesis is ascertained, to go to its opposite for the other. Of 
the Scriptural servant the apostle says ; " If thou mayest be made 
free." What is the present state of that servant who is to be 
made free ? It would seem rather hard to escape the blunt force 
of this passage, unless we could devise a process whereby a man 
already occupying a certain state might still be put into the same. 
Clearly, if at the time, the party was out of a state of freedom he 
was in a state of slavery. 

4th. Words are always to be understood with reference to the 
state of society in which they were spoken, its usages, prejudices, 
«fec. Now two things, I apprehend, all parties admit : First, That 
the term servant, when literally employed by the tongue or pen 
of an apostle, always fell among a people where slavery prevailed. 
Again, the Greek terms translated servant in the New Testament, 
in common parlance out of the Church, did always carry the idea 
of slavery. These facts suggest two instructive inquiries. Did 
there actually exist any considerable class of free domestics in 
that state of society ? If there did, would the apostles address 
them by terms universally applied to another and far more de- 
graded caste ? Dares any white man at the South look a man 
of his own color in the face and call him "slave," and speak of 

*I am not to be here understood as giving a portraiture of slavery at large. For what- 
ever be the evils of this institution, in our own country slaves are generally a happy peo- 
ple, and not greatly distinguished for immorality. I design simply to present those pecu- 
liar temptations to vice in the slave, which would most naturally attract the legislation 
of a moral governor, and thus furnish a key to the character addressed. 



22 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 

his " master ?" The usages and prejudices of all slaveholding 
society are dead against any such signification of the word. 

Finally, The opinions of the learned should always have weight 
with us. The uniform current of testimony from historians, gen- 
ral scholars, and Biblical critics, settles the fact beyond contro- 
versy, that there were slaves in the primitive Church. My brother 
from Virginia, adverting to the favorable bearing of American 
testimony on this subject, has reminded us of the sentiments of 
two of our most distinguished scholars occupying very different 
positions in the ecclesiastical world, Drs. Charming and Wayland. 
Of the mass of favorable testimony beyond the waters,! will sim- 
ply glance at the opinions of two still more eminent Biblical 
students. Lardner argues against the authority of the so-called 
"Apostolical Constitutions," because they provided such an un- 
reasonable multitude of holidays for the slaves. To imagine that 
so serious an encroachment upon the rights of the master would 
have been tolerated for a moment in that state of society, he holds 
to be perfectly absurd. You see his opinion. Horne, in com- 
menting upon 1 Tim. vi. 1, states the fact that one class of the 
Pharisees taught that the proselyte in becoming a Jew abandoned 
all his heathen relations, social, civil and natural. He supposes 
it probable that this party would apply their doctrine to Christi- 
anity, and contend that the convert on entering the Christian 
Church left slavery behind him. He understands Paul in this 
passage to strike at this class of primitive Abolitionists when he 
taught this lesson : in order that blasphemy against the name of 
God and his doctrine might be averted, it is the duty of servants 
under the yoke to count their masters worthy of all honor, love and 
service. Nor did he hesitate to pronounce those early Abolition- 
ists who " teach otherwise " ungodly, proud, ignorant, contentious, 
and mischievous to the last degree ; persons to be avoided on ac- 
count of their sentiments, spirit, and conduct. 

It does not appear to me, Mr. Moderator, that I have passed by 
any of the great ordinary rules for interpreting language, nor 
travelled far to find them, nor forced their application to the sub- 
ject. It would be strange indeed if all this body of principles 
verily work the other way, and teach that a servant under the 
yoke is a freeman above it. 

II. But this historical argument finds a refuge in a second posi- 
tion. Admit the existence of slavery under the eye of the apostles, 
yet the peculiar abominations of our American system demand that 
the Church should instantly and indignantly rise up and pronounce 
it accursed of God. But what comparison is there between the 
modei n and the ancient institution ? By Roman law, slaves were 
held "pro nullis, pro mortuis, pro quadrupedibus." The master 
might force his slave to become a harlot, or a gladiator ; might 
chastise him without limit as to method, severity, or continuance ; 
might torture him at will for crime, caprice, or pleasure ; nay, 
might put him to death at any time, in any manner, for any pur- 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 23 

pose, or for none. The distinctive Roman principle was this : That 
a slave could not be injured by his master. I venture to affirm that 
there is not an inch of ground in these United States where an}' 
one of this catalogue of cruelties could be inflicted without awa- 
kening the instant vengeance both of law and public sentiment. 
When men in our day cut up and feed out their slaves to give 
their fish a richer flavor ; or sit at ease and enjoy themselves in 
the excruciating tortures by which the slave gives up life before 
their eyes ; or when the blood of hundreds in one sacrifice is shed 
upon the grave of a departed kinsman in some sort of sympathy 
with his ghost, — it will not then be in season to speak of the pe- 
culiar excesses of slavery in our day. 

I put it to you, Mr- Moderator, whether this Historical argu- 
ment does not share the fate of its predecessors ? If the apostles 
did verily regard slavery in the days of ancient Rome as a domes- 
tic relation which Christianity might regulate and Christians 
might fill, what right has any uninspired disciple of Jesus to pro- 
nounce this institution under the moderated features of our own 
day, such an insufferable sin against God as demands its instan- 
taneous abolition, be the consequences what they may? 

IV. The Progress Argument. 

I should have been gratified to hear some more distinct state- 
ment of the mode of reasoning relied upon under this head. 
From the discussions rather of the lobbies of this house than of 
the floor, as far as I have been able to understand the mind of 
my brethren, the sentiment seems to be this : Ancient language 
concerning slavery is inapplicable in our day, in view of the 
greater light of modern times. The argument, I apprehend, they 
would state thus : The divine withholdment of specific truth in 
ancient times left the sin of slavery uncondemned. The provi- 
dential impartation of greater light in our day calls upon us to 
come out and condemn it. 

Permit me to inquire whether the introduction of this topic 
does not reduce the reasoner to an unwelcome alternative. If 
his Scripture argument has foundations, and the Bible verily 
teaches that slaveholding is sin per se, then this argument fails. 
If the Progress argument has foundations, and Scripture has not 
furnished any definite light upon the subject, then the Scripture 
argument fails. Be this as it may, I invite your attention to three 
answers to the reasoning under this head. 

I. The argument has no foundations. The conclusion lacks a 
premise. It is not true that decisive light touching the character 
of this institution was withheld from the primitive Church. 

1st. The end of my brother's argument would seem to forbid 
this position. 

I admit that God does withhold truth on various topics, and 
for various reasons. For instance, when the mind is unprepared 
to receive it through lack of intellectual developement. Paul 



24 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 

would now lay down advanced principles of religion, but his 
slow-learning brethren are not able to bear the teaching, and 
he must needs still feed them with milk when they should be 
living upon stronger diet. So when there is a lack of moral prepa- 
ration through prejudice. Jesus did not at first disclose to his dis- 
ciples the exact dignity of his person, the manner of his death, his 
purposes touching the future relations of the Jews and Gentiles 
to his Church, &c. &c. Offenses, too, of inferior criminality God 
does sometimes comparatively wink at for a season, which at a 
future time he fully exposes and condemns. I apprehend, how- 
ever, that these offenses will always be found to be inula prohibita, 
and that there is not, in all God's revelation to man, any approxi- # 
mation to the fact which this argument assumes. Here is a case 
of sin per se, a case of the most flagrant enormity. God brings 
it up again and again in the Old Testament and in the New, but 
never, never to the close of the sacred canon reveals its true 
character, and actually ceases to speak to man, leaving him to find 
out as best he can, that this whole thing is a stench in his nos- 
trils, and that he expels the perpetrator from the fellowship of 
his people. I lay no great stress upon this point of evidence, j*et 
I would respectfully ask my brother whether there is not some- 
thing like a quarrel between the first necessary fact of his Pro- 
gress argument, viz., that God of old withheld from man his judg- 
ment of the moral character of slavery, and the conclusion which 
he builds his argument to sustain, viz., that slaveholding in itself 
is an outrageous offense against God. 

2d. The Scriptures emphatically forbid it. 

What additional instructions upon this subject could have been 
reasonably expected in God's Word? It cannot be denied that 
the institution of slavery is made the subject of deliberate and 
systematic regulation, both in the Old Testament and in the New ; 
that in both, the relative duty of the respective parties, the mo- 
tives by which they are to be actuated, the spirit they are to cul- 
tivate, the ends they are to seek, the temptations they are to avoid, 
the final account to which they are held, and the solemn retribu- 
tion they must expect, are all stated and discussed with ordinary 
perspicuity. Now if the Progress argument is true, and God has 
withheld reasonable instructions concerning the character of this 
relation, on what topics, I ask, has God given us what might be 
termed a reasonable degree of information ? I venture to affirm 
that the whole catalogue of social relations, husband and wife, 
parent and child, brother and sister, ruler and subject, pastor and 
people, &c, scarce furnishes a solitary instance of more perspicu- 
ous, definite, frequent, or extended Scripture teaching. One fact 
every eye accustomed to overlook the holy page will promptly re- 
cognize, namely, that this doctrine of master and servant is fre- 
quently brought up by holy writers in immediate connection with 
the most clearly defined and important human relations, and not 
only treated as to general method precisely as they are, but not 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 25 

unfrequently with decidedly greater particularity and elaboration. 
I put it to you, Mr. Moderator, whether this argument does not 
fail at its foundations 1 It sets out with the allegation that God 
in the Scriptures has actually failed to give man due light as to 
his duty in the relation of master and servant ; an unreasonable 
allegation, by the way, since it charges God either with incapa- 
city, for he has certainly made many efforts to convey such in- 
struction, or with malignity, for he wilfully hides needed truth, 
and leaves man to wander unwarned in desperate sin. But if the 
world has no right to rise up and charge God with having wick- 
edly left us in the dark touching duty in the great relations of 
husband and wife, parent and child, ruler and subject, &c, then 
this Progress argument fails, and we need not that man should 
mend the perfect work of his Maker in this matter. 

II. It destroys the foundations of the Bible. You say, my bro- 
ther, that God of old gave not to man by revelation adequate 
knowledge of the moral features of slavery. Very well. You 
say that the world in her progress has reached advanced provi- 
dential light on this topic ; and you are prepared now to speak 
out touching the enormity of the institution. Very well. Now, 
brother, where is my Bible ? I will trust you with this responsi- 
ble office — Go through the Word of God and gather together all 
the topics on which man needs Divine teaching, and has received 
no more than God has given us on the subject we discuss. You 
yourself will admit that here are the residue of the great social 
relations which make up more than half of human life ; these 
must all be thrown by as so many great moral topics on which we 
have as yet no adequate inspired instruction. Here, too, are a 
thousand acts which I daily perform, and ten thousand views and 
feelings embracing God and man, of whose moral character I have 
no more discriminating Bible instruction than I have of the duties 
of master and servant. All these too must be laid aside as 
matters about which I have yet to learn where and how the line 
of duty is to be drawn. I call upon you to tell me where is my 
Bible. See, my brother ! These providential lights bring us no 
arbiter. How shall we reach the decisive truth on any one of 
these multiplied points about which God has so inconsiderately 
neglected to inform us ? You say that light upon slavery has 
reached you, and that by the law of Human Rights every holder 
of a slave is bound to release him instantly. 1 insist that provi- 
dential light has reached my mind also, and that the law of Hu- 
man Rights requires the master to keep his hold upon the servant 
for the present. Now I beg you to bear in mind that you, a poor, 
fallible creature interpreting the lights of Providence, are not my 
Bible. My Bible is God acting arbiter between fallible men, and 
stating the truth. And now I insist upon it, if your Progress ar- 
gument is right, and there is no adequate Scripture light on the 
subject of slavery, and of course no adequate Scripture instruc- 
tion on the nine hundred and ninety-nine points of Christian duty 



26 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 

of which God has said only as much, then you have taken away 
my Bible, and I am undone. But this is not all. 

III. It sets up a Bible of humanisms in the place of the Word of 
God. I know not what child of man's crazy fancy you may not 
make Bible to me upon the principle of your Progress argument. 
Here is the doctrine of Womanism, so solemnly baptized of late 
in the West by a string of Female Conventional Resolutions. 
Your P ogress argument puts as large a basis under this vagary 
as under your Abolitionism. The Scriptures we think sufficiently 
explicit in defining woman's position in society. It tells us that 
the head of the woman is the man, for woman was made second, 
and is the weaker vessel. As such she is commanded to submit 
herself to her own husband, as to the Lord, and to be subject to 
him in everything. If she would be chaste, discreet, or obedient, 
she must be a stayer at home, that she might bear children, guide 
the house, and build the same. But the moment she leaves her 
modest sphere, and would assume a more conspicuous and com- 
manding position, that moment Scripture meets her with the out- 
cry, " It is a shame for a woman !!" &c; that moment Scripture 
sends her back with the mandate, " Let the woman learn in si- 
lence with all subjection," " For it is not permitted unto them to 
speak nor to usurp authority, but to be in silence." All this 
would seem to indicate clearly enough that it does not belong to 
woman to take the lead in human society. 

But your doctrine, in the hand of the champion of this new 
light, assumes that all these Scriptures were penned in a dark and 
barbarous age ; that doubtless God had many things to say, im- 
portant to the perfect development of woman's capacities, rela- 
tions, and rights, but these preparatory lights had not then come, 
and consequently society was not able to bear the revelation. 
Now, however, in her onward progress, society has reached the 
abundant and elevated teachings of history, science, and univer- 
sal improvement. Now the shades of Scripture times are passing 
away, and hosts of new truths are coming to light. More con- 
spicuous than all, nature's grand doctrine of Liberty and Equali- 
ty springs to view, and, favored by the novel and glorious illus- 
trations of popular government, what a hearty cheering it radi- 
ates through all the ranks of the oppressed. No wonder woman, 
downtrodden into the very earth from its foundations, should be- 
gin to feel the stirrings of sympathy with her long-lost rights ! 
No wonder she now begins to realize in all her soul that her 
Maker's hand has formed her just as free, just as gifted, just as 
worthy as her companion, and that there existed not the shadow 
of a reason why she should not have been permitted to enjoy her 
equal rights in filling the higher stations of life, and to employ 
her equal capacities in the distinguished toil of lifting man to his 
destined perfection. Poor thing ! What a barbarous usurpation 
has stripped her all life long of the high prerogative of her nature, 
and doomed her to stand back and resign all share in making 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 27 

laws, governing States, commanding armies ! What a glorious 
da3 r for woman ! Providence with his new lights has come to 
her rescue. Let arrogant, rebuked man now give place, and 
welcome woman to her legitimate dignities. 

Mr. Moderator, why are not Womanism, and Communism, and 
Socialism, and Shakerism, and every other foolery of the earth, 
as well founded upon this doctrine of Progress, as Abolitionism? 
We say that the duty of master and servant, the social position 
of woman, the law of property, &c. &c, are all clearly revealed 
in the Scriptures, and that man has no commission to perfect the 
Word of God, and thus the matter is at rest. But our opposing 
brethren contend that God of old made revelation to man only as 
he was able to bear it, and that new developments were to be 
providentially expected in the progress of society ; that revelation 
upon the subject of slavery, as upon many other topics, was only 
partial, and that new light has now come, and that the world 
must follow it. I ask now, why have not these fanatics respec- 
tively as much right to affirm, first, that for the hardness of man's 
heart revelation of old was only partial touching the Rights of 
Woman, the Distribution of the gifts of the Creator, &c. &c; se- 
cond, that new light has come to man on these points respective- 
ly ; and, third, that the world must follow it ? 

In weighing this argument let me say — 

1st. That the Bible is a revelation to man. 

Therefore that progress which either ascertains the original im- 
port of the text by sound rules of construction, or discovers that 
this or that old or new method of living is or is not covered by 
this or that rule of Scripture, — such progress, I say, is legitimate, 
and onward to the Millennium. 

2d. The Bible is not a revelation to a generation. 

Therefore that progress which proposes to enlighten the proper 
original import of God's W6>d ; which, confessedly or covertly, 
leaves the Scriptures to find the rule of life in improving develop- 
ments, — I say such progress exactly cuts the cable after the ship 
has gone to anchor because she could not live in the tempest. A 
law above the Constitution may possibly be seen in one direction, 
but progress beyond the Bible is out of sight altogether. 

I put it to you, Mr. Moderator, whether I may not lay by this 
Progress argument with its predecessors? For if it so far fails 
of its end as to put down God's Word, and set up human extrava- 
gance, like the residue of the catalogue, it turns upon its author 
with a vengeance. 

V. The Practical Argument. 

Brethren contend that experience establishes the essential sin- 
fulness of slaveholding. The gospel reforms society. The Church 
has effectually tried the doctrine that slaveholding is not essen- 
tially sinful, and nothing is done. And nothing will be done un- 



28 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 

til we change the ground, come back to the truth, and make 
slavery — sin. 

To this argument it might be responded, If the tardiness of the 
operation disproves the genuineness of the principle, why not 
throw up the plan of missionary operations ? Surely our mis- 
sionary progress has been slow. Why not look up another reli- 
gion ? Christianity, after 6,000 years, has yet most of her work 
to do. But I answer more particularly : All things considered, if 
more has been done by the gospel in many branches of Christian 
benevolence in this land, during the last thirty years, I know it not. 
_ Let us study the work of the Southern Church with an impar- 
tial mind, and inquire whether opposing brethren, instead of vent- 
ing a prejudiced conscience fretted by the imagination of a sta- 
tionary criminality in the whole business, should not thank God 
and take courage, in view of the wholesome progress of the 
cause ; and instead of calling for discipline upon Southern breth- 
ren, whether they should not heartily lend a helping hand in the 
work they do ? I invite my brethren to glance over the field, 
with me, and candidly weigh the following considerations. 

I. The strongest and purest expression of anti-slavery sentiment, 
probably ever made by man, has been uttered by the South. 

I doubt not that pure and strong Anti-slavery convictions are 
entertained at the North, and that our brethren furnish every rea- 
sonable evidence of their sincerity and earnestness. But we have 
no evidence yet of the supreme strength of this conviction. How 
will you try the purity and the power of a sentiment in the hu- 
man heart ? Surely not by words only ; not by any process of 
stubborn and imperious public agitation ; not by any determined 
political stand against Southern measures ; not by any transient 
aid and comfort rendered to flying slaves. All these and many 
similar developments may cost but little. On the contrary, the 
power of a principle exhibits itself in the labors it can put forth, 
the oppositions it can resist, the self-denials it can bear,— in a 
word, by the sacrifices it can make. Where shall we find the 
most commanding expression of that calm, enlightened, benign, 
high-souled Anti-slavery sentiment which is uttered by sacrifice? 
You point us to England. For freedom in the West Indies, 
20,000,000 pounds sterling ! ! This was a noble testimony of her 
will to give freedom to the slave, the like of which our Northern 
friends have never approached. Three things, however, should 
work some abatement of our first impressions of British devotion 
to this cause. This sum was furnished by the very richest trea- 
sury in the world. Only the interest of this sum has been paid ; 
the principal never will be until the great English debt is can- 
celled. Nor do I deem it scandal to say, that probably no small 
portion of this sum was paid to self-interest, and not by benevo- 
lent principle. A friend travelling in England at the time of the 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 29 

preparatory public agitation of the subject, informs me that one 
argument which told powerfully in persuading the English people 
to adopt this measure was the widely published doctrine that, 
since free labor was so far superior to slave labor, by this opera- 
tion West India sugars would be purchased in England at a pen- 
ny a pound below its present cost, so that England would receive 
100,000,000 pounds in return for her 20,000,000. 

It gives me pleasure to remind you, Mr. Moderator, that near 
250,000 slaves are computed to have been freed in this country, 
mainly at the South. Assuming the average value of the slave 
to be 100 pounds sterling, you have, sir, upon this principle more 
than five and twenty millions of pounds sterling contributed 
to this cause of putting away slavery from these United States by 
the slaveholders of the South. Mark the contrast. This im- 
mense sum has been actually paid out, not interest only, but 
principal also ; not by a rich public treasury, but by private 
families who lived by the slaves they surrendered; not before 
the public eye, but in the retirement of private life ; not under 
the cheering voice of universal praise, but possibly under the 
chilling looks of many a neighbor who charges the emancipator 
with the discontent which now springs up in the bosom of his 
colored family ; not under circumstances which provided the 
slightest hope of pecuniary emolument, but from no other possible 
motive than conscientious, quiet, kind, anti-slavery sentiment. 
Let Northern brethren weigh this, and hereafter give to the 
South the respect due to the very first position of friendship to 
African freedom by pecuniary sacrifice. 

II. The men who dwell south of Mason and Dixon's line have 
done more to convert the heathen than the whole world beside. 

What is the whole number of converted heathen which the 
American Church presents this day to the eye of God and the 
world ? — 

American Board, 26,000 

Baptist Missions, 15,000 

Methodist Missions, 13,000 

Presbyterian Missions, 250 

Episcopal Missions, 71 

54,321 

Observe, Mr. Moderator, one branch of one Christian denomi- 
nation at the South, viz., the Methodist Episcopal Church num- 
bers 134,722 Colored members. More than twice as many heathen 
converted through Southern instrumentality as the combined 
American Church can produce. 

What, sir, allow me now to inquire, is the sum total of the 
membership of all the heathen churches in the world ? By those 
best informed on this subject the number is estimated at some- 
thing like 200,000. Turn your eye once more to the South. Say 



30 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 

nothing of the Colored members of all the churches in the State 
of Maryland, (and they are numerous,) nor of the Presbyterian 
Church, nor of the Episcopal Church, nor of the Lutheran 
Church, nor of certain branches of the Methodist and of the Bap- 
tist denominations, in all the South. Simply fix your eye upon 
one branch respectively of two Christian Churches. You will 
find enrolled upon their list of Colored members — 

In the Methodist Church, 134,000 

" Baptist Church, 130,000 



264,000 

Thus, sir, a part of the Southern Church holds up this day to 
the gaze of heaven and earth- scores of thousands more of heathen 
fellow-men hoping in Christ through their labors than all the 
chwches of the Free Soil of the world combined have yet gathered, 
to the Master. Let philanthropists employ all proper methods to 
free the soil of the world. It is a noble cause, and I will unite 
with them. But let our Northern brethren weigh one singular 
fact : These very brethren of the South, upon whom they them- 
selves have been laying on so hard and so long for their cruel 
oppression of the bondman, and whom forsooth from year to year 
they have been so anxious to persuade Providence to thrust out of 
the Church, as not worthy of a standing in it, — these are the very 
men whom that very Providence has made the honored instru- 
ments, in one sense at least, of doing more for the salvation of the 
heathen world than all the Church militant beside. Yes, let them 
ponder this. 

III. The Southern Church has effected a vast amelioration of the 
social and religious condition of the slave. 

When landed in this country, the African captive belonged to 
the most degraded heathen upon the face of the earth. His de- 
scendant still needs great improvement, but is far removed from 
the universal debasement of his progenitor. Changes for the 
better have marked the history of slavery, from its introduction 
to the present hour. 

1st. The Southern Church has done her part in working valu- 
able modifications of the laws of the land.* An examination of 
the slave laws of successive generations will exhibit a steady 
advance in the considerate benignity of the legislator. Nor, 
should we overlook the beneficial changes wrought in the spirit 
and power of ancient statutes, through a constantly-improving 
public sentiment. There are benefits conferred upon the slave 
by statute, which of old never fully reached him in the adminis- 
tration. From the earliest times there existed a law, forbidding 
labor on the Sabbath. I well remember, when a boy, the uni- 
versal custom of taking the servants on the Sabbath day to the 

* Vide Appendix, (1). 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 31 

corn-house to shell, or to the potato-field to dig, that the weekly 
plantation-allowance of vegetable diet might be distributed. 
This practice, I apprehend, is now universally abolished. That 
the spirit and principle of the Church did its part in effecting the 
change, you may learn from this incident. I knew a church 
member, who, grieved by the prevalence of this custom, person- 
ally persuaded his Christian brethren and friends to abolish it in 
their respective families, and finding one stout opposer of the 
innovation, beyond the limits of the Church, he at last calmly 
apprised him of the law of the land, and of his purpose of becom- 
ing Public Prosecutor if he did not yield to the public sentiment 
of his neighbors. There always existed a law forbidding the in- 
human correction of a slave. lam persuaded that there never 
existed in Southern society such excessive violations of this law 
as some uninformed persons at a distance imagine. Yet I well 
remember a state of things which must have operated to break 
the power of this benign statute. Years ago, any allusions to a 
Southern master's treatment of his slave would have colored his 
face as promptly and indignantly as though you had intermeddled 
with his conduct towards his wife, or his child, or his disposition 
of any chattel on his farm. But public sentiment on this subject 
has undergone such a change, that every community feels itself 
a trustee to some extent of the natural and legal rights of the 
slaves that dwell in its bosom, and the beneficiary now gets the 
fair protection of this law. It may throw light upon the manner 
in which this reformation was wrought, if I inform you that many 
years since, a Christian hearing that a servant had been cruelly 
chastised on a neighboring plantation, availed himself of the 
Patrol system of the South, and having ascertained the fact by 
personal observation, informed the overseer that he should prose- 
cute him for breach of law. He did so, and had him convicted 
and punished. I stood by the side of that Christian man when 
he received intelligence that the enraged owner, in a neighbor- 
ing city, had avowed his purpose to shoot him down as a dog 
wherever he met him. One year afterwards, I was again walk- 
ing from a religious meeting by his side, when the son of the 
threatener delivered to that faithful Christian the father's permit 
to enter the only plantation in the county which had heretofore 
been closed against the good man's private visits for the religious 
instruction of the servants. In most of the Southern States there 
exists an old law, which forbids that a slave should be taught to 
read. When a boy, I well remember my conviction of the terri- 
ble authority of this edict. To the Southern mind in that day, to 
violate this law seemed a little like taking one step toward the 
application of the match to the magazine. Now, how changed 
is the feeling? The good influence of the Bible upon the slave, and 
every man's right of direct access to the Word of God is exten- 
sively understood. It has long been a common spectacle to see the 
children of a Southern family at night, or on the Sabbath, em- 



32 



SFEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 



ployed in teaching the servants to read. It is many years since 
night-schools, in which Colored adults taught Colored children to 
read, were common in all our Southern cities, and I believe well 
known to city authorities, and generally unmolested by them. It 
is worthy of observation, that a few years since, when a South- 
ern Legislature, alarmed by Abolition interference, revived this 
obsolete law, Christian public sentiment at the South felt if Cae- 
sar moved to put away the Bible from the servant, God's people 
must move, as best they can, to bring it back. A consequent 
impulse was given to Oral Instruction far and wide, whose 
results have been singularly happy. One is this: that hundreds 
of servants learn to read now, where none were taught before. 
And hundreds of copies of the Scriptures are distributed among 
the slaves at this day, which would never have been received if 
the old law had been permitted to sleep. Thus you perceive 
that the steady improvement of public sentiment at the South, in 
part through the fidelity of the church, has been progressively 
working a beneficial change in the face of the government to- 
ward the slave, not only by procuring the enactment of humane 
laws, but by breaking down the governing power of unfriendly 
statutes, and giving force to such benign legislation as was a 
dead letter before. 

2d. The same causes have wrought a corresponding social im- 
provement in all things pertinent to the present comfort and future 
prospects of the slave. I apprehend there is but little to be ob- 
jected to at this day, in the physical treatment of Southern ser- 
vants. Their condition is at least fair in respect to food, raiment, 
shelter, work, and general discipline. A remarkable revolution 
has occurred in the habits of Southern society respecting the dis- 
cussion of the nature and claims of this relation. Haifa century 
ago, this institution appeared to the mass of Southern population 
as an impregnable fixture ; and yet it is a singular fact, that, as 
a topic of deliberate meditation or discourse, it was clothed with 
a forbidding awe, which made it almost as intangible as a plot of 
treason. Now, he who journeys through the Southern States, in 
public houses and conveyances may hear as frequent discourse 
on this subject as on almost any other. And could he compare 
the sentiments of the present generation with those of the past, 
he would be delighted to mark the liberal tendency of the times. 

The steady advance of the spirit of emancipation is another 
and most interesting feature of the general progress. The re- 
cords of the American Colonization Society furnish gratifying 
testimony on this point. You will not forget, Mr. Moderator, the 
testimony of one of our brethren on this floor, that in his imme- 
diate vicinity one of his neighbors had recently given to this cause 
$500 ; another, $1,000 ; a third, -$2,000; a fourth, $3,000— all men 
in moderate circumstances. Yes, sir, and in the wealthier sec- 
tions of the South there are those who are this day giving their 
$50,000 to the freedom of the slave. 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 33 

3d. In no respect, however, has the condition of the slave been 
more decidedly improved, than in his religious privileges. It 
is not surprising that his claims to spiritual care should have 
been early neglected. There was nothing encouraging in the 
state of the pupil, for he was exceedingly dark and unintelligent 
at best, and there existed no common language between himself 
and his teacher ; and nothing energetic in the spirit of the teacher, 
for the Church in that day had not been aroused to the high duty 
of transmitting God's truth to all within her reach. Since that 
•period, however, light from heaven has been gradually shed upon 
the Southern Church, and she has responded to the appeal. To 
the observant eye, the Southern country is full of testimonies to 
this truth. The dark, dreamy, superstitious views of religion, into 
which the colored population naturally fell in the beginning, are 
rapidly giving place to better teaching. In the early order of 
things in Southern society, the Church rarely made its way to the 
humble domiciles of the plantation to carry the gospel to their in- 
mates, while the servants who found their way to the church of 
their masters were called to participate in ordinances designed 
primarily for others, and of very little comfort or profit to the un- 
lettered. Left to themselves, the colored population very natu- 
rally constructed a system of worship very greatly deficient in 
truth, full of error, embracing in its active services large mea- 
sures of bodily exercise, under repetitious and noisy songs and ex- 
hortations, and producing a Christian experience which consisted 
of little more than a tissue of dreams, visions, "travels," &c. It 
is now, however, many years since Southern conscience was 
taught to feel that it had a duty to discharge to the benighted ser- 
vant — a duty too long neglected. To this duty the Church be- 
took itself, with commendable energy and system, and the face of 
the kingdom in this section of the country now presents a very 
different aspect. 

There are a diversity of established methods in which the mas- 
ter brings the gospel to the servant. In the cities there are large 
Colored churches, sometimes of two or three thousand members. 
[Church edifices they are assisted to erect when necessary.] The 
pulpit is generally supplied by pious, talented, Colored preachers; 
sometimes by white brethren of the very first talent and highest 
stations in the Church.* Sabbath-schools, under the tuition of 
intelligent white teachers, male and female, are in common use 
in cities, towns, and villages. On plantations masters frequently 
conduct family prayer, so as to secure sound instruction to the 
servant. The travelling minister is almost always put in requi- 
sition for this service. Instead of the old-fashioned Negro "praise- 

* One such church finds a regular pastor in the President of a College, who receives a 
salary from the Blacks of $G00 or $800. A valued Professor in a Theological Seminary 
vacated his chair to devote himself exclusively to the instruction of servants. The Presi- 
•dent of Washington College, Va., recently resigned his office to conduct a periodical de- 
signed to convince his countrymen of the evils of the relation of master and servant. 
3 



34 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 

house," it is common in many parts of the country to build a neaf 
"Plantation Chapel," and to invite all accessible ministerial aid, 
I am happy to know that on this subject of giving judicious reli- 
gious instruction to the Colored population, there is a very com- 
mendable fidelity on the part of the stated ministry in all sections 
of the Southern country. Should you happen to enter a sanctu- 
ary in Virginia, when a Presbytery was in session, you might 
possibly hear the roll called, and each minister in his place sum- 
moned to give an account to his brethren, according to a stated 
order, of what he was doing within his bounds for the people of 
color ; nor would you be more fortunate than I have been, if some 
holy elder, (who, peradventure, paid a missionary to teach his 
servants,) should rise a little out of order because he could not 
contain himself, and most tenderly and solemnly express the feel- 
ings of his conscience and heart, descriptive of that burden of re- 
sponsibility to God and to the servant, which he felt rested in 
common upon himself and all his brethren. Had your Presbytery 
been assembled in South Carolina, the ministers would not have 
escaped with so general an inquiry. Each, in his place, would 
have been called to answer whether he had preached, during the 
interval of Presbyterial sessions, one half of every Sabbath to the 
servants of his neighborhood. 

But the most important features of this reformation are yet to 
be noticed. Catechisms to aid the master in the private instruc- 
tion of his servant have been drawn up, if I mistake not, by every 
prevalent denomination of the South, and distributed amongst the 
people. The country, too, has been largely districted, (where this 
operation was most needed,) and a Missionary employed to devote 
himself exclusively to the Colored population within the pre- 
scribed limit, in preaching, teaching, visitation, and Sabbath- 
school supervision. It is 'ascertained that the churches built for 
the worship of the masters, are in many cases injudiciously lo- 
cated for the accommodation of the slaves ; and I am credibly 
informed that it is quite common to erect a new church in some 
position selected exclusively for the convenience of the Colored 
population, and devoted entirely to their service. I can think of 
no religious meetings on this earth more delightful, none that my 
heart more ardently pants to enjoy, than the worship of the mas- 
ters and servants of adjacent plantations, under the ministry of 
their beloved Missionary. My own past experience forbad me 
to wonder at the tears of sympathy and joy, which lately fell from 
the eyes of a good master, while casually sketching to me in pri- 
vate his habitual enjoyment of such a privilege. In testimony to 
the sound, conscientious, intelligent interest which is felt by the 
Southern Church on this subject, I will only further say, that Es- 
says, Reports, Pastoral Letters, Periodicals, &c, have long been 
in course of publication ; that ecclesiastical bodies of all denomi- 
nations have long been accustomed to give their highest authority, 
their best services to this cause ; that Conventions, formed by 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 35 

delegates from different States, and composed of the very first 
men of the land, have sometimes devoted days to the most libe- 
ral discussion of this whole subject ; and I am just now assured 
by one well informed upon this subject, that the whole system of 
imparting religious instruction to servants in all parts of the South 
is in a healthful and improving condition. 

It occurs to me here, that my Abolition brother has been com- 
forting himself at heart under the imagined recital of the indirect, 
but sure results of his own bold and fearless stand for Christianity 
and the oppressed. I apprehend that truth before God requires 
some considerable abatement of this self-complacent, most confi- 
dent conviction. You remind me that improvement in the condi- 
tion of the Southern slave has certainly been cotemporaneous with 
the Abolition movement of the North. The same period dates a 
similar improvement in almost every branch of Christian benevo- 
lence, in the cause of Missions, the Bible, Tracts, Temperance, 
<fec. Were these, too, the fruit of Abolition effort ? Does not a 
general effect call for a general cause 1 And is not all this ad- 
vance of the kingdom to be accredited to a general diffusion of 
God's Spirit upon his Church ? You respond, that agitation is the 
means which the Spirit, ordinarily employs to effect general refor- 
mation. You will find it difficult of proof, however, that the agi- 
tation of the subject of slavery occasioned by the Abolition 
movement has secured that progress at the South, which I have 
endeavored to sketch. There are three grand objections to the 
wholesome power of the Abolition effort, arising out of one fact — 
the position of the agitator, beyond the limits of the body to be 
reformed. 1st. Such an agitator will always lack influence. 
His very first blow, and every successive one, strikes upon ancient 
prejudice, and wakes up opposition, and it will be felt and said 
constantly, You are a stranger, an intermeddler, an enemy ; 
and he will be sure to lack power over those he would move. 
2d. Such an agitator will lack knowledge. He is not on the 
ground. He does not see and know that of which he speaks, and 
his zeal will tempt him to devour greedily the extravagances cast 
upon his ears ; and you may rest assured these, his errors and ex- 
travagances, will be promptly detected and largely overrated by. 
the assailed, to the limitation of his influence. 3d. Such an agi- 
tator will be very apt to lack sympathy and discretion. He is not 
part and parcel with the body he would reform, and will be almost 
sure to be deficient in that spirit of tender interest, forbearance 
and allowance, that constant, cautious fear of the disastrous con- 
sequences of speaking too strong, or going too fast ; all of which 
are so indispensable to the success of every reformation move- 
ment. Mr. Moderator, the sun does not shine, if the influence of 
our friends at the North, who would reform the South by their 
violent speeches and measures, is not, to some extent, like the 
agency of him who locks the door of the house he would enter. 
Yet I have never felt with Southern men in general that this was 



36 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 

the only influence of Abolition on the South. Whether the na* 
tural, necessary effect of the movement to rouse attention to the 
subject, and to cast light upon some branches of it, has or has not 
been counterbalanced by the mischiefs proceeding from the extra- 
vagance of its radical principle, the uncharitable spirit of the 
agitator, and his frequent errors in statement, positively and stub- 
bornly advanced, I cannot say. But my conviction is very deci- 
ded, that our Abolition friends are accustomed to overrate their 
connection with Southern improvement, and to underrate home 
influence in the same. Mr. Moderator, without recurring to his- 
tory for its proof, I venture to express the opinion, that as it was 
in the great Reformation, so in general it is in the multitude of 
moral reforms effected by the progress of society, in every part 
and age of the world, — the successful agitators are integral ele- 
ments of the body reformed. The influence, the sympathy, the 
minute knowledge, the admirable discretion, and the undying in- 
terest, almost necessary to every such achievement, would seem 
to demand it. Whether the substantial progress of the interest- 
ing Cause of the Bondman of the South has not been effected in 
the same manner, I leave you to judge, upon the statement of a 
few facts. 

There has been unceasing agitation of this subject, in the wisest 
and happiest manner, by Southern men, from the date of the land- 
ing of the first slave on American soil. You know, sir, that be- 
fore the Constitution of the United States was framed, while yet 
we were colonies of England, the Southern States protested 
against the introduction of this population. Now, sir, from that 
day to this, I affirm that Southern records, political, religious, 
literary, and historical, present a constant succession of publica- 
tions on the subject of slavery, by Southern men of the highest 
rank and talent, in Church and State, embodying as great a de- 
gree of accuracy, kindness, discretion, and fidelity of sentiment 
as characterizes any similar number of publications uttered at 
the North within the last twenty years. If there is any approach 
to truth in this statement, Mr. Moderator, with all the powerful 
and various advantages of home influence, have all these efforts 
been powerless, while similar efforts from abroad have been re- 
forming the land ? Again, sir, from the earliest period of our his- 
tory, ecclesiastical bodies at the South, and especially of the Pres- 
byterian order, have held up this subject to their churches, and 
pressed reiigious duty upon the conscience just as far as, in their 
Christian judgment, they were permitted to do. What has been 
the influence cf this steady movement through past generations ? 
I intend no disrespect, but for reasons too obvious to need a state- 
ment, I must be permitted to say, if any member of this body 
imagines that a strong Abolition announcement by this General 
Assembly will approach to the power over the Southern Church 
which will always follow the calm, solemn, faithful appeal of her 
own Presbyteries or Synods, he makes a great mistake. 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 37 

Mr. Moderator, why may not reformation commence at home ? 
Are the masses so involved in a common interest and prejudice 
against the truth that they are not likely to see and appreciate it? 
But bear in mind, all reformation commences with individuals, 
and all history shows that there ever have been at the South 
individual friends of the truth, awake and active upon this sub- 
ject. These publications and decisions of old, brought to bear 
upon the Colored race, what reformation element do they lack? 
There is mind there, and truth there, and the gospel there, and 
the Spirit there; — certainly, too, a closer view of the necessities 
of reformation, deeper interest in the work to be done, and higher 
influence over the body to be moved. Mr. Moderator, to some 
small extent I hold myself a witness in this case. I know by 
personal observation, that these Southern efforts have carried 
reformation power.. Prior to the day when the South felt fretted 
by Abolition interfence, now more than twenty years ago, I well 
remmember that a Christian man, born and bred at the South, 
rode many miles, called on me at my domicile in the State of 
Georgia, and solicited me to become a member of a Society 
which he purposed to form for the " Religious Instruction of the 
Colored Population." This devoted and talented minister of 
Jesus was himself made the General Agent of the Society origi- 
nated at that time. Through him we put forth the first year an 
able tract on the "Degradation of the Southern Slave,''' and scat- 
tered it through the county. This, sir, did its work. We had 
our anniversary, and reported progress. The second year we 
drew up, and published, and distributed an able essay on the 
"Obligation of the Master" I noticed the effect of this document 
in all my itinerations. During the third year we published a 
"Catechism" to aid this responsible master in the discharge of his 
duty to this necessitous member of his family, — a document, let 
me say, of such singular value, that it found its way across the 
waters to the table of a missionary of the American Board, who 
thought he saw in it the precise desideratum for his own field, 
and had it printed, and set to the work of reformation among the 
heathen abroad. Suffer me to say that this Society has been in 
steady operation from that day to this, not only sending its Agent 
around the district to instruct the slaves at convenient station- 
houses erected for the purpose, but annually reporting, and occa- 
sionallv publishing as necessity demanded. To the favorable 
influence of this movement, first upon the population under its 
immediate supervision, then upon the counties adjacent, and 
finally, through its publications, upon the friends of the cause at 
a distance, and even in other States, multitudes can bear witness. 
What had Abolition to do with the origin or power of this opera- 
tion ? . 

It was my privilege, about the period of the formation of this 
Society, to visit an eminent Christian who dwelt in a neighbor- 
ing State, and where, you will remark, there now prevails through 



38 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 

all the surrounding country as high a degree of religious fidelity 
to the Colored population as distinguishes any section of the 
South. I learned that he had been in the habit of employing a 
minister to preach to his large family of servants for many years. 
He informed me that, though his neighbors far and near were at 
that time favorable to this species of operation, yet when he first 
commenced it, he was told that his movement endangered the 
peace and the lives of the whites, and he must desist. He an- 
swered their arguments, and moved forward in his duty. They 
became more serious in their objections: he still persisted. At 
length their opposition waxed so firm and united that he was 
driven to tell them : "Gentlemen, I am engaged in my duty, and 
before I give it up, I will plant a cannon in every window of my 
house, and you shall go over my dead body to take away the 
Word of God from my family." I had the pleasure of preaching 
the gospel in his neighborhood, when the conversion of some of 
his early opposers led him to give me this history. Here is an 
operation that dates back its origin perhaps forty years from this 
time. What had Abolition to do with the waking up of this 
man's mind to duty? Now while we accord to this Northern 
movement, with all its ill-workings, some collateral stimulation 
of a good cause, its friends, in turn, should concede that where- 
ver similar improvements are witnessed in Southern society at 
this day, they may have had a similarly independent origin. 

Here let me arrest this elaborate narration with one remark. 
This subject is presented at great disadvantage, for it comes be- 
fore you, not through the pen of the historian who had explored 
the ground and collected the facts, but simply through the casual 
recollections of one who, years ago, was an eye-witness of some 
portions of the operation. 

Mr. Moderator, what shall we say of this argument? Has 
nothing been done under that Anti-slavery doctrine which Abo- 
litionism opposes? Sir, weigh the enormous disadvantages 
against which the Reform principle had to contend: the interest* 
the powerful interest, that both blinded and opposed the agent ; 
the prejudice, the public sentiment, the laws that stood so direct- 
ly, so strongly, so menacingly in the way; and, in what branch of 
Christian benevolence has more been effected in the same time? 
You have seen, sir, that by the outlay of a sum of money four 
times as large as the whole American Church has contributed to 
all Christian causes from the beginning,* Southern men have 
earned the honor of exhibing the very noblest Anti-slavery senti- 
ment uttered by any class of men in our day; that the Southern 
Church have been the happy instruments, under God, of baptizing 
a larger number of heathen brethren than all the missionary op- 
erations of the world beside ; that, by a self-denying, laborious, 
and intrepid zeal, they have wrought a change in the social and 

* See Appendix, No. III. 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 39 

religious condition of the servant, and the public sentiment of 
masters, which cannot fail to impart the deepest gratification to 
every bosom that ever felt one beat of philanthropy for the bond- 
man. 

I put it to you, Mr. Moderator, whether this argument of my 
brethren does not belong to the same catalogue of impregnable 
proofs of the principle it was enlisted to overthrow? If moderate 
Anti-slavery sentiment has really done so much, God and the 
truth must be with it. 

I repeat, sir, the fair statement of the acknowledged facts of 
the case shows that slaveholding is not sin per se. So signally 
true is this, that every argument advanced to establish the doc- 
trine overthrows its own ^foundations, and builds up the doctrine 
opposed. 

SECOND. THE DUTY OF THE PARTIES CONCERNED. 

The duty of all parties may be comprised in one brief sentence: 
Come to the Word of God. 

Let the Master come to the Word of God, and do what that 
Word so plainly enjoins. Let him remember that, in general, he 
owes his servant the love that belongs to every brother man ; 
and, in particular, that kind and faithful guardianship which will 
give him that which is just and equal in his relation. So doing, 
he will be sure to labor to lift him ultimately above the disad- 
vantages of his present position, by the wisest and surest method 
which his judgment and circumstances may suggest. 

Let the Servant come to the Word of God, and do all which 
that Word enjoins. Let him, in general, love his master as he 
should love every fellow man, and be particularly careful to dis- 
charge, with cheerfulness and fidelity, all the duties which Scrip- 
ture devolves upon him as a servant. Let him strive to be con- 
tent with his providential condition, and do nothing to alienate, 
but everything to secure the good-will of his master. 

Let the Non-slaveholding brother in the Church come to the 
Word of God, and see to it that, in general, he speaks to that 
master as God speaks to him in the Bible, and to that servant as 
God speaks to him in the Scriptures. And let him especially be- 
ware, lest he set himself above the Apostles and their Lord, by 
teaching such doctrines, touching these parties respectively, as 
the New Testament has not revealed, and by addressing such 
counsel to the parties as the New Testament never gives. 

God has.made Duty the appointed channel of divine blessing. 
All e;ood will follow fidelity here. 

1." Nothing like Bible duty will build up the character of the 
parties. I am persuaded that there is nothing which will more 
beautifully develop the Christian character of the master, than a 
conscientious, just, and sympathizing discharge of all his Scrip- 
ture duty to his servant: nothing which will more certainly or 



40 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 

happily perfect the Christian character of the servant, than a 
studious, steady effort to serve his master in strict accordance 
with the spirit and terms of Scripture requirement. 

2. Nothing like Bible duty will brighten the prospects of the 
parlies. As for the servant, his present comfort and future hopes 
depend far more upon his fidelity than upon any other conceiv- 
able influence. Only let him be faithful toward God and man, 
and he will feel, in the depths of his own heart, the abiding con- 
solation of high-souled virtue ; a sustaining sense of integrity, 
cheered by the joy and peace of ever-flowing benevolent affec- 
tion. Only let him be faithful, and his fidelity, as nothing else 
can, will be sure to act upon the master's intellect and conscience, 
so as to open his mind to clearer and still clearer views of his 
elevated relative duty, and win upon his heart to do for this hum- 
ble, faithful friend all that wisdom and love suggest. Nothing 
like mutual fidelity will so certainly or so soundly convince the 
master that slavery, on the whole, is not a wholesome condition 
of human society for either party. It intrusts too much unguard- 
ed power to imperfect man. This he will daily feel. It subjects 
the degraded yet elevated capacities of an immortal nature to 
too unpropitious a school for desirable development. This he 
will daily see. Such, I judge, will be the class of reflections and 
influences which mutual fidelity will be sure to bring to bear 
upon the master's mind. The result is obvious ; an augmenting 
perception of what, on the whole, is best for both parties, and a 
growing, generous inclination to do for the inferior that which 
will ultimately plant him and his posterity upon the grand plat- 
form of equal rights. 

3. Nothing like Bible duty will secure the friendship of the 
parties. Mutual daily action upon such principles must make 
the intercourse increasingly pleasant and kind. And when the 
slave is ultimately raised to freedom by the master's generosity, 
while the master feels it is more blessed to give than to receive, 
the nature of that gift will never, never permit the masters 
kindness to be effaced from the freedman's heart. Go and con- 
verse with the ( flicers of the American Colonization Society — 
they will tell you freedom, thus obtained, is entailing eternal and 
tenderest friendship between these long embittered races. Who 
does not see that this is God's way of doing this work .' 

4. Nothing like Bible duty will display the very brightest glory 
of Christianity. Behold the operation of Christianity in working 
off slavery from the face of the earth ! There is no relation un- 
der heaven so tryingty, desperately abject on the one hand, nor 
independent on the other. Consequently there is no such field 
amongst men for the exercise of generous, self-controlling, self- 
denying sympathy with the helpless on the one hand ; nor of noble, 
cheerful humility, unrewarded, self-sacrificing consecration on 
the other. Thus, more singular and beautiful specimens of celes- 
tial virtue, than the gospel will work out in gradually dismissing 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 41 

slavery from the earth, I do not expect to behold in the day of the 
revelation of all things. 

5. Nothing like Bible duty will heal the breach of the Church. 
The strife of Christian brethren should be allayed. Let all par- 
ties come to the Word of God. Now we see eye to eye. Now, 
brother harbors dishonoring sentiment — utters provoking lan- 
guage — presses excommunicating measures against his brother no 
more. No ! he now takes a different view both of the character 
and condition of his brother. He sympathizes, he encourages, he 
advises, he cooperates. The darkened, struggling, tempted, bur- 
dened mind of the other ! who can tell what seasonable counsel, 
encouragement and strength in its momentous, self-denying work 
it imbibes from all this fraternal sympathy? Thus, kind patience 
on the one hand generates teachable respect on the other, and the 
brethren are brought together, and God's good work is accom- 
plished. 

6. Nothing like Bible duty will ease of the friction of the na- 
tion. Pronounce slaveholding sin per se, and act upon your dog- 
ma. There can be no cordial respect — no courteous language — 
no kind cooperation. There can be no compromise — no patience — 
no safe association. The one faces the other as a desperate 
wrong-doer. The second bristles up against the first as an im- 
pertinent, fanatical, provoking accuser. Mark ! it is this very 
doctrine which is cutting, at this very hour, upon the tie of the 
Union with more severing energy than all other agencies com- 
bined. Let the State as well as the Church come to the Word of 
God — respect, cordiality, compromise spring up, and perilous fric- 
tion instantly subsides into harmony and peace. 

Now, let the parties violate this injunction, and fail to come to 
the Word of God, and continue to legislate for themselves on this 
subject, and act on the doctrine that slavery is sin per se, and what 
will be the issue? 

Nothing can more seriously mutilate the character of master 
and servant ; for it spreads an influence over the spirit of both, 
and makes the one hostile and insurgent — the other suspicious 
and severe : nothing so effectually dissipate the prospect of pre- 
sent comfort or future deliverance ; for without respect, the serv- 
ing of the one must be pure hardship — without love, the spirit of 
the other will never cherish an inclination to emancipate : noth- 
ing so certainly destroys all the foundations of friendship ; for 
Abolitionism will disturb both parties for the present, and, if it 
ever frees the slave, it will entail an eternal hostility upon the 
races it tears apart: nothing more grievously wrong Christian- 
ity; for it will spoil those lovely shapes of Christian virtue to 
which the providence and Word of God entitle her in the glorious 
progress of the Gospel : nothing more surely aggravate the pre- 
sent mischievous agitation of the Church, or compel Jacob's chil- 
dren ultimately to fall out by the way: nothing has hitherto 



42 



SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS, 



so fearfully shaken the State to its foundations — and nothing so 
sure to split it to atoms in the end. 

Mr. Moderator, if there is an error in this land which light and 
love summon us instantly to abandon, it is, in my judgment, the 
doctrine that to hold a slave, no matter on what principle, for 
what end, is sin against God. 

Mr. Moderator : For a series of years our Abolition brethren 
have been violently knocking at your door, and demanding the 
discipline of the Southern Church for the sin of slavery. If they 
can bear one word more, I shall be pleased to inquire whether 
they ever imagined what would follow an imitation of their spirit 
and practice by the Southern Church? Should it surprise them 
if, in her turn, she should respectfully solicit at your hand a 
solemn inquiry into the moral character of Abolitionism, and a 
recommendation to your inferior courts to purge the Church forth- 
with of this offensive element? 

Confine your investigation to a single development of the prin- 
ciple. 

It will not be denied, I presume, that a line of Abolition posts 
has been long since established on the extreme southern border 
of the Free States, from the Mississippi river, perhaps to the 
Atlantic, organized to apprise the oppressed population beyond 
the line that the moment a slave makes his way across to Free 
Soil he will there find every arrangement made, every power at 
hand, to transport him rapidly from his house of bondage to a 
safe refuge in the bosom of Canada. Reports of annual progress 
are frequently published by these organizations. 

What, sir, is the moral influence of this movement, 

1st. Upon human resjject for the authority of the Word of God? 
God's Word delivers various commands to the servant, — com- 
mands, every line of which, be it remembered, carries just as 
much Divine authority as any text of Holy Writ. What is the 
influence of the obvious spirit, ordinary language, and prominent 
act of this frontier movement, upon the authority of God's Word, 
especially on the mind of the slave? Is it possible for human 
ingenuity to invent a method which shall enlist a more palpaple 
or powerful moral force to break down in the soul of the slave 
all regard for God's commands to him in the Bible ? Does not 
this whole movement as it were put a violent hand upon him, and 
force him into a direct and outrageous disobedience of every Di- 
vine injunction addressed to him in the Scriptures? Reflect! 
His master, God in the Bible commands him "to honor" "to obey" 
" to serve" " to submit to" " to please" " not to despise" " not to 
answer again" " not to purloin from." Now, these Abolition 
brethren who meet the flying slave on the shore — does the spirit, 
they breathe towards his master, the words they address to him 
about his master, the act they perform in its relation to his mas- 
ter, produce any other effect than to stir up the whole heart of the 



DELIVERED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 43 

servant into the most positive and flagrant violation of the spirit 
and letter of every word of God to his soul concerning his duty 
to that master. 

Oh, my brethren ! I would that every bondman on the face of 
the earth were possessed of the freedom you so highly prize. But, 
the Bible ! the Bible ! ! framed to do this and every other good 
work for man — what deep and shameful dishonor you cast upon 
this Blessed Bible !! The violent tendency of this conduct is to 
break down the power of the Bible upon the face of the whole 
earth. Mr. Moderator, with great kindness I must be allowed to 
say, whatever benevolent promptings toward man do beat in the 
heart of my- brethren, this, their act, in its moral bearing upon the 
Scriptures, I hold to be great dishonor to God, great hurt to the 
earth, and, therefore, great sin against God and man. 

2d. Upon the character of the master, the servant, and the agent ? 
Collect every command of God to the master as well as to the 
servant, in the Holy Scriptures, and I think you will find that 
this your frontier movement violently tempts the one party, and 
provokes the other to direct and universal disobedience. And if 
this is so, what must be its influence upon the agent? Mr. 
Moderator, when God at great expense and in great love has 
stooped from heaven expressly to mark out the only path in which 
perishing man must walk to find spiritual deliverance, is it not a 
great sin that Christian men should throw themselves violently 
between God and the soul he is rescuing, and press that soul 
away from the path of life 1 Is it not the greater sin in that it is 
done in direct violation of apostolic example in similar circum- 
stances ? Can such work as this be of sanctification to the soul 
engaged in it ? 

3d. There is one far more delicate, more shocking bearing of this 
frontier movement, which, Mr. Moderator, my brethren will par- 
don me if I advert to for an instant. I mean its corrupting, I am 
pained to say, its degrading influence upon a certain class of young 
ministers of the gospel. A young man has a generous and intrepid 
spirit : this is felt and valued by his every friend. Penid venture 
nature has not so largely endowed him with discretion and a 
sense of the propriety of things. He is called to Christ, and com- 
missioned to preach the gospel. Kinsmen and acquaintances 
alike anticipate a life of heaven-blest devotion to the good cause. 
He becomes an Abolitionist. He sees his seniors all around him 
building shelters for the refugees, collecting funds, providing 
means, appointing agents, and forming plans to secure their res- 
cue. Yes, sir, he sees them upon the bank opening wide their 
arms, and lifting high their inviting voice to the bondman across 
the river. What wonder, Mr. Moderator, that his fired soul 
should boldly, I will say generously, if misguidedly, over-step the 
line, and risk his own freedom in a clandestine enterprise to de- 
liver the fellow-creature he had been taught to believe was so 
wickedly oppressed ? A Judge on the bench, in the State of -Mis- 



44 SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY RESOLUTIONS. 

souri, once informed me that such a young minister had just been 
brought before him. The evidence was irresistible. No sym- 
pathy, no learning, no eloquence, no possible interposition, could 
protect him from the issue. He further assured me that he had 
received reliable information, that since his departure from home 
two others had been arrested under similar circumstances, whom 
he feared he should be compelled to dismiss to the same inglorious 
destination. Nor is Missouri the only State where such unhappy 
transactions have taken place. 

Now, Mr. Moderator, I feel aggrieved for the honor of the de- 
nomination to which I belong, I feel aggrieved for the stained 
character, the wounded feelings, the blighted influence of these 
young servants of the Lord. Yes, sir, I feel for them ; for I have 
heard of the generous and noble nature of one of them, of his fa- 
vorable influence upon his keepers and his miserable companions 
in confinement ; and, sir, I charge it to Abolitionism that such 
young men have been betrayed into such grievous impropriety. 
I hold it the legitimate fruit of its own wretched extravagance. 

My brethren, unaffronted, will allow me to speak out, and say, 
not that it should tinge the cheek, but that it should rouse the 
judgment and awaken the conscience of every disciple of his 
creed, to be assured that his own Abolitionism has put forth a 
power, and wrought a deed in various sections of the country 
which, after regular judicial investigation, stands pronounced 
upon the records of this nation to be literally that very act which 
they themselves are wont to impute to other men as the consum- 
mation of all shame. 

Mr. Moderator, I forbear. I simply designed by this (perad- 
venture) rude suggestion to throw, if possible, some new light 
upon some of the many bearings of this solemn subject, that my 
brethren may reflect upon what seems not a little like hastening 
to form exaggerated conceptions of the guilt of others without a 
due consideration of the infelicities that lie at our own door ; not 
a little like the indiscretion of driving Providence from his own 
field, and taking his work into our hands. 



APPENDIX 



APPENDIX. 



i. 

One grand allegation of Abolitionism is this: That Southern laws regard slaves as 
chattels only. That they are treated as human beings also, may be learned from the 
following sketch of some of the provisions of the laws of Georgia furnished by one of the 
Judges of the Supreme Court of that State. Such, in general, are the spirit and tenor 
of the laws of every Southern State. 

1. By the Constitution of the State, any person who shall maliciously dismember or 
deprive a slave of life, shall suffer such punishment as would be inflicted in case the like 
offence had been committed on a free white person and on the like proof, except in case 
of insurrection, and except in cases where such death may happen by accident in giving 
moderate correction. — Constitution of Georgia, Article 4, Section 12. 

By the act of 1799, this article of the constitution is fully carried out. By that act 
the proceeding, the law and the evidence, and the punishment, in case of murder by a 
white man of a white man are made applicable to the murder of a slave. — Prince's 
Big. 786-'7. 

2. Any person other than the owner, overseer, or employer, who shall heat, whip, or 
wound a slave, without sufficient cause or provocation, is guilty of a misdemeanor, and 
punishable with fine and imprisonment, or both, at the discretion of the Court. — Hotch- 
kiss' Digest, 770. 

3. Any owner or employer of slaves, who shall cruelly treat such slaves by unnnecea- 
sary and excessive whipping, by withholding proper food and sustenance, by requiring 
greater labor than they are able to perform, or by not affording proper clothing, whereby 
their health may be injured or impaired ; or cause or permit the same to be clone, is pun- 
ishable by fine and imprisonment, or both, at the discretion of the Court. — Hotchkiss' 
Digest, 779. 

4. If any person shall on the Lord's Day, employ a slave at any work or labor, (works 
of absolute necessity, and the necessary occasions of the family excepted,) he shall for- 
feit and pay the sum often shillings for every slave thus caused to work. — Hotchkiss, 770. 

5. Persons selling spirituous liquors to slaves, are punished with fine not less than ten 
nor more than fifty dollars for the first offence ; for the second, with fine not exceeding 
five hundred dollars and imprisonment not exceeding sixty days, at the discretion of the 
Court. — Hotchkiss, 771. 

6. Provision is made for trying the question of freedom at the instance of any person 
of color claiming to be free; the question of freedom or not, is to be tried by a jury 
before the Superior Court, as at common law — Hrtchhiss, 802, 3, 4, 5. 

7. By the act of 1815, it is made the duty of the Inferior, or County Court, of each 
county, to afford relief to infirm slaves, in their discretion ; whenever they are certified 
upon oath that they are in a suffering conoition from the neglect of their owners. And 
they are empowered to sue for and recover the costs of such relief out of the owner. — 1 
Prince, 791. 

8. An Infirmary for aged and afflicted negroes was established by law at Savannah. 
The corporators have power to receive and maintain such aged and afflicted negroes, 
residents in the State, as they may deem proper objects of their benevolence.- -Hotchkiss, 
206, 7, 8. 

Before the act of the last Legislature, slaves were tried for capital offenses, before the 
Inferior Court. Now they are tried as white persons are tried, before tin- Superior 
Court, upon presentment, or hill found by the Grand Jury, and by a jury sclcnedfor 
the purpose, as in case of a white man. — Acts oj Ib4!)-'M), page 372 

As a judictai exposition of the character and condition of negroes as chattels, nnd at 
the same time human creatures, I refer to the opinion pronounced by i e r u Iges in 
Convention in the case of The State vs. Philpot. The Convention i ■ Ju I - was at 



48 

APPENDIX. 

V 



faints as the Legislature may i mpos f „ / g0Vermn S the slave, sbject to such re 
and involuntary sertzVp Tl,l i lp ° se (,n the master, and of enioyimr hil , 

object to the ^Snt^nV eTv^S 727" ^ l ° ^^^SKS 
pratechon, «nd hound t0 obey te™ZZ** J"™?' ?* human b™g*J«bhc7toi£ 
Georgia upon this subject, thaUr their ^ A " d S0 careful were the neonle 5 

of free white persons are ' They 'are „faj ft T* T^ ** the Uk a " d "™be™ 
1S l%**dthe lav,* throughout In OkSuS g ^ lnM ~ a » «<■ of 1811 and 

~^ S ^£^,^^ 1 ^ *- - ^e right 

for the same offense.-^ o/ ^ 2&f « ^ * W- They cannot be tried hSH 

such moderate chastisement as may be nSss art for T^r *"""? bein ^ strained to 
°; d, r i0n ' Th ^ ^ve likewise secured to them P f °* ^ ^ P rese ™ion of a 



irom tne b,rth-day of her Christian libera li v w " ' """f °* the A ™nca, 
advised on all this subject. I, eSdbiXl' % P , repared at ^ ^^st by 
nent Benevolent Societies of thfs cou rV ^ r> ft l^™ " of each oi « 
from the beginning :— c °"ntiy, together with the sum total of its co 



advised on all this subject t, ^Jj!.!,"?' was _ Prepared at my request by one well 

"•ation of each of the premi- 
um total of its contributions 

jljjj: |5^SSB3S5t*£ar M,ssi °" s w» 

1816. American Bible Society, ASS0Ciatlon > 1,183,834 

7fii«" r> ," Ed "cation Society, 3 500,000 

1816. Presbyterian Board of D^M^^;;; W 42 650 

1820. Methodist Missionary St"' ---^ 5KS 

isof' f p,sc °P al Missionary Society 1,848,577 

-]. American Sunday-school Union! 942 -458 

,^' Tract Society,. . 1,878,410 

IR2R " o f ° me Mis sionary Society 2,462,771 

o R '. „ Seamens' Friend Society 1,897,259 

1832. Baptist Home Missionary Association 3l5 > 344 

1833. Presbyterian Board of P^Eons!! **"» 

,„„ . " Publication 960,934 



Foreign K^EfcS"*-*. < B ^'-> '• SS 

184b. American Protestant Society 196,675 

American Colonization Society 9 2,812 

„ , " 1,000,000 

General contributions of the Amerieinrt,,, u , 

Total, ue American Church from the beginning, 

Southern contribution for 'the 'can* nf f™ •"""• -425,«68,557 

cause of Emancipation, nearly jfeioOO^OO 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011 898 539 4 




m ■; \ 



